Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.

Hardcore Husky Podcast: Hot Football Talk

2»

Comments

  • H_DH_D Member Posts: 6,098
    First Anniversary 5 Up Votes 5 Awesomes First Comment
    Dardanus said:

    image

    Did we* hire a new TE coach?
  • SweatpantsGeneralSweatpantsGeneral Member Posts: 2,046
    First Anniversary 5 Up Votes 5 Awesomes Name Dropper
    Is everyone who listened direct linking or iTunes. I can't see it in iTunes and several others have said the same. It automatically downloaded because I subscribe, but non-subscribers seem to be having a problem. Thanks in Advance.
  • SoutherndawgSoutherndawg Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 8,226
    5 Awesomes First Anniversary 5 Up Votes First Comment
    Founders Club
    edited June 2016
    Good podcast again guys.

    Just my 0.02 @koopdog, but I think you should have stuck to your guns describing Oregon's store bought teams (great line by @DerekJohnson) as really really good, not great.

    Oregon has had an excellent run. They deserve a lot of credit for what they've done, even more so when you consider they have done so without vast in state high school talent to build upon. Coffee cups or not, Oregon has done a great job in building a program. However, IMO, what has kept them from being considered great has been their inability to handle really good physical teams that have speed and are disciplined. Teams like Ohio State, LSU, even Boise State. Running past inferior opponents looks impressive, but I don't think a football team can be considered great without having the physicality to take it to anyone they face.
  • RoadDawg55RoadDawg55 Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 30,123
    First Anniversary First Comment 5 Up Votes Combo Breaker
    Swaye's Wigwam

    Good podcast again guys.

    Just my 0.02 @koopdog, but I think you should have stuck to your guns describing Oregon's store bought teams (great line by @DerekJohnson) as really really good, not great.

    Oregon has had an excellent run. They deserve a lot of credit for what they've done, even more so when you consider they have done so without vast in state high school talent to build upon. Coffee cups or not, Oregon has done a great job in building a program. However, IMO, what has kept them from being considered great has been their inability to handle really good physical teams that have speed and are disciplined. Teams like Ohio State, LSU, even Boise State. Running past inferior opponents looks impressive, but I don't think a football team can be considered great without having the physicality to take it to anyone they face.

    Not this again. They made two title games in five years.
  • SweatpantsGeneralSweatpantsGeneral Member Posts: 2,046
    First Anniversary 5 Up Votes 5 Awesomes Name Dropper

    Good podcast again guys.

    Just my 0.02 @koopdog, but I think you should have stuck to your guns describing Oregon's store bought teams (great line by @DerekJohnson) as really really good, not great.

    Oregon has had an excellent run. They deserve a lot of credit for what they've done, even more so when you consider they have done so without vast in state high school talent to build upon. Coffee cups or not, Oregon has done a great job in building a program. However, IMO, what has kept them from being considered great has been their inability to handle really good physical teams that have speed and are disciplined. Teams like Ohio State, LSU, even Boise State. Running past inferior opponents looks impressive, but I don't think a football team can be considered great without having the physicality to take it to anyone they face.

    Not this again. They made two title games in five years.
    Win half a natty and some Rose Bowls and stuff this century and THEN POP OFF!!!!!!!11!!!1!!
  • HuskyInAZHuskyInAZ Member Posts: 1,732
    First Anniversary Name Dropper 5 Awesomes First Comment
    koopdog said:

    Good podcast again guys.

    Just my 0.02 @koopdog, but I think you should have stuck to your guns describing Oregon's store bought teams (great line by @DerekJohnson) as really really good, not great.

    Oregon has had an excellent run. They deserve a lot of credit for what they've done, even more so when you consider they have done so without vast in state high school talent to build upon. Coffee cups or not, Oregon has done a great job in building a program. However, IMO, what has kept them from being considered great has been their inability to handle really good physical teams that have speed and are disciplined. Teams like Ohio State, LSU, even Boise State. Running past inferior opponents looks impressive, but I don't think a football team can be considered great without having the physicality to take it to anyone they face.

    I don't disagree with you in principle, but I was trying to suck Derek off so I can do more podcasts with him.

    Seriously, tho - when he challenged me it brought up the idea of what was "great". I was thinking Alabama, Ohio Stateish as great. There's only one "the best" and @puppylove_sugarsteel @RaceBannon and @PurpleJ can tell us who that is. So, during the pod I was thinking it might just be my Oregon bias because they come close but no cigar.

    In terms of our conference. No question, as Sark would say.

    @RoadDawg55 brings up a good poont. My point was not necessarily to quantify Oregon so much as it was to discuss how progress works on the sigma scale.

    I guess "great" can be subjective depending on the angle. I bet my "great" for a blowjob would be better than say ---- @Fire_Marshall_Bill

    I now Tequillaed myself.

    TL,DR

    I don't pay attention to tags, but if this one doesn't exist, it should.

  • PurpleJPurpleJ Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 36,381
    First Anniversary 5 Up Votes 5 Awesomes Combo Breaker
    Swaye's Wigwam
    koopdog said:

    Good podcast again guys.

    Just my 0.02 @koopdog, but I think you should have stuck to your guns describing Oregon's store bought teams (great line by @DerekJohnson) as really really good, not great.

    Oregon has had an excellent run. They deserve a lot of credit for what they've done, even more so when you consider they have done so without vast in state high school talent to build upon. Coffee cups or not, Oregon has done a great job in building a program. However, IMO, what has kept them from being considered great has been their inability to handle really good physical teams that have speed and are disciplined. Teams like Ohio State, LSU, even Boise State. Running past inferior opponents looks impressive, but I don't think a football team can be considered great without having the physicality to take it to anyone they face.

    I don't disagree with you in principle, but I was trying to suck Derek off so I can do more podcasts with him.

    Seriously, tho - when he challenged me it brought up the idea of what was "great". I was thinking Alabama, Ohio Stateish as great. There's only one "the best" and @puppylove_sugarsteel @RaceBannon and @PurpleJ can tell us who that is. So, during the pod I was thinking it might just be my Oregon bias because they come close but no cigar.

    In terms of our conference. No question, as Sark would say.

    @RoadDawg55 brings up a good poont. My point was not necessarily to quantify Oregon so much as it was to discuss how progress works on the sigma scale.

    I guess "great" can be subjective depending on the angle. I bet my "great" for a blowjob would be better than say ---- @Fire_Marshall_Bill

    I now Tequillaed myself.

    TL,DR

    I read it. Begrudgingly.
  • SweatpantsGeneralSweatpantsGeneral Member Posts: 2,046
    First Anniversary 5 Up Votes 5 Awesomes Name Dropper
    PurpleJ said:

    koopdog said:

    Good podcast again guys.

    Just my 0.02 @koopdog, but I think you should have stuck to your guns describing Oregon's store bought teams (great line by @DerekJohnson) as really really good, not great.

    Oregon has had an excellent run. They deserve a lot of credit for what they've done, even more so when you consider they have done so without vast in state high school talent to build upon. Coffee cups or not, Oregon has done a great job in building a program. However, IMO, what has kept them from being considered great has been their inability to handle really good physical teams that have speed and are disciplined. Teams like Ohio State, LSU, even Boise State. Running past inferior opponents looks impressive, but I don't think a football team can be considered great without having the physicality to take it to anyone they face.

    I don't disagree with you in principle, but I was trying to suck Derek off so I can do more podcasts with him.

    Seriously, tho - when he challenged me it brought up the idea of what was "great". I was thinking Alabama, Ohio Stateish as great. There's only one "the best" and @puppylove_sugarsteel @RaceBannon and @PurpleJ can tell us who that is. So, during the pod I was thinking it might just be my Oregon bias because they come close but no cigar.

    In terms of our conference. No question, as Sark would say.

    @RoadDawg55 brings up a good poont. My point was not necessarily to quantify Oregon so much as it was to discuss how progress works on the sigma scale.

    I guess "great" can be subjective depending on the angle. I bet my "great" for a blowjob would be better than say ---- @Fire_Marshall_Bill

    I now Tequillaed myself.

    TL,DR

    I read it. Begrudgingly.
    you're braver than I thought.

    image
  • Fire_Marshall_BillFire_Marshall_Bill Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 22,718
    First Anniversary 5 Awesomes 5 Up Votes Combo Breaker
    Founders Club
  • SoutherndawgSoutherndawg Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 8,226
    5 Awesomes First Anniversary 5 Up Votes First Comment
    Founders Club
    koopdog said:

    Good podcast again guys.

    Just my 0.02 @koopdog, but I think you should have stuck to your guns describing Oregon's store bought teams (great line by @DerekJohnson) as really really good, not great.

    Oregon has had an excellent run. They deserve a lot of credit for what they've done, even more so when you consider they have done so without vast in state high school talent to build upon. Coffee cups or not, Oregon has done a great job in building a program. However, IMO, what has kept them from being considered great has been their inability to handle really good physical teams that have speed and are disciplined. Teams like Ohio State, LSU, even Boise State. Running past inferior opponents looks impressive, but I don't think a football team can be considered great without having the physicality to take it to anyone they face.

    I don't disagree with you in principle, but I was trying to suck Derek off so I can do more podcasts with him.

    Seriously, tho - when he challenged me it brought up the idea of what was "great". I was thinking Alabama, Ohio Stateish as great. There's only one "the best" and @puppylove_sugarsteel @RaceBannon and @PurpleJ can tell us who that is. So, during the pod I was thinking it might just be my Oregon bias because they come close but no cigar.

    In terms of our conference. No question, as Sark would say.

    @RoadDawg55 brings up a good poont. My point was not necessarily to quantify Oregon so much as it was to discuss how progress works on the sigma scale.

    I guess "great" can be subjective depending on the angle. I bet my "great" for a blowjob would be better than say ---- @Fire_Marshall_Bill

    I now Tequillaed myself.

    TL,DR

    Totally agree "great" can be somewhat subjective. IMO great equates to exceptional, which I believe fits well within the context of the Six Sigma example you were discussing. That last step to exceptional is incredibly difficult, few achieve it. In that context, programs like Alabama, Ohio State, Miami, USC, Oklahoma, Nebraska and a few others have produced multiple great teams over multiple decades. That's deserving of the "great" label. Regarding Oregon I think your intital thoughts, close but no cigar, are right, that's not a slight, just an objective point of view.

    Blowjobs are a way better topic, @Fire_Marshall_Bill 's silence on the subject speaks volumes. Maybe the definition of great is different for givers than receivers. @Hondo true?







Sign In or Register to comment.