Genuine Question for the Quooks
Comments
-
Between my internets and my phone something is going to get broken
-
-
He's full of it. He's selling the brand because it's in his best interest.DoogCourics said:So the Quook King of all Quooks, Justin Hopkins, said something yesterday on the radio during his Oregon preview that legitimately caused me to question if I heard correctly.
He stated that the Ducks will have the best front 7 in the Pac-12. I know Jelks and Scott are really good players, as well as Dye.
But while I admittedly didn't watch enough of Oregon to know, I can't name another player in that front 7.
Is this Koolaid something that all Quooks are drinking right now? Genuinely curious.
TIA
-
Flash in the pan.dnc said:
From 94 to 03 Oregon won 5, UW won 4. Oregon hosted 5, UW hosted 4.Mosster47 said:Your 1994 calendar is as good as mine.
You're 8-17 against Oregon over the last 25 years.
From 94 to 03 Oregon finished above UW in the conference 4 times. UW finished above Oregon in the conference 4 times. And they tied two times.
There's no real reasonable argument for Oregon passing UW before 2001, but even then UW smashed them the next two years. Realistically Oregon passed UW in 2004. So 12 years. Call it 15 if you prefer I'm good with.
Major lol at 25. -
I’m embarrassed for you.Mosster47 said:Oregon and UW are opposites on D this year. UW is really good on the back end and will be average up front, Oregon the opposite. In the Pac-12 I'm not sure which is better. They play some stupid football out west.
As far as position breakdowns Jelks would be UW's top book end by a country mile. Hollins would probably start at the other end spot for them also as the 40 personnel works a lot differently. Oregon's backer group is way better top to bottom, no one would argue that. UW has better starters in the secondary. I would take Oregon's depth at safety and the corner depth is probably a wash. D-lineman is probably a wash too. Gaines and Scott are big time gap stuffers and everyone else is a Pac-12 D-lineman which equals mediocre at best.
Both of these defenses and going to get rail roaded a few times this year as they have holes.
I’ll buy the Oregon run. Always have. But this drivel is a new low, even for you.
Ever thought of rehab? Consider this an intervention. At least have your eyes checked. Get your cataracts removed. -
10 wins during the regular season and I'll pay up. Zero chance that happens.Baseman said:
I’m embarrassed for you.Mosster47 said:Oregon and UW are opposites on D this year. UW is really good on the back end and will be average up front, Oregon the opposite. In the Pac-12 I'm not sure which is better. They play some stupid football out west.
As far as position breakdowns Jelks would be UW's top book end by a country mile. Hollins would probably start at the other end spot for them also as the 40 personnel works a lot differently. Oregon's backer group is way better top to bottom, no one would argue that. UW has better starters in the secondary. I would take Oregon's depth at safety and the corner depth is probably a wash. D-lineman is probably a wash too. Gaines and Scott are big time gap stuffers and everyone else is a Pac-12 D-lineman which equals mediocre at best.
Both of these defenses and going to get rail roaded a few times this year as they have holes.
I’ll buy the Oregon run. Always have. But this drivel is a new low, even for you.
Ever thought of rehab? Consider this an intervention. At least have your eyes checked. Get your cataracts removed. -
Certainly not saying that. Oregon was better than UW for quite awhile and was an incredible program under Chip and Chip residuals. Not sure you'll be getting back to that level anytime soon, very sure we won't be dropping back to our 00's level anytime soon.dtd said:
Flash in the pan.dnc said:
From 94 to 03 Oregon won 5, UW won 4. Oregon hosted 5, UW hosted 4.Mosster47 said:Your 1994 calendar is as good as mine.
You're 8-17 against Oregon over the last 25 years.
From 94 to 03 Oregon finished above UW in the conference 4 times. UW finished above Oregon in the conference 4 times. And they tied two times.
There's no real reasonable argument for Oregon passing UW before 2001, but even then UW smashed them the next two years. Realistically Oregon passed UW in 2004. So 12 years. Call it 15 if you prefer I'm good with.
Major lol at 25. -
Even you're not that stupid.Mosster47 said:
10 wins during the regular season and I'll pay up. Zero chance that happens.Baseman said:
I’m embarrassed for you.Mosster47 said:Oregon and UW are opposites on D this year. UW is really good on the back end and will be average up front, Oregon the opposite. In the Pac-12 I'm not sure which is better. They play some stupid football out west.
As far as position breakdowns Jelks would be UW's top book end by a country mile. Hollins would probably start at the other end spot for them also as the 40 personnel works a lot differently. Oregon's backer group is way better top to bottom, no one would argue that. UW has better starters in the secondary. I would take Oregon's depth at safety and the corner depth is probably a wash. D-lineman is probably a wash too. Gaines and Scott are big time gap stuffers and everyone else is a Pac-12 D-lineman which equals mediocre at best.
Both of these defenses and going to get rail roaded a few times this year as they have holes.
I’ll buy the Oregon run. Always have. But this drivel is a new low, even for you.
Ever thought of rehab? Consider this an intervention. At least have your eyes checked. Get your cataracts removed. -
-
Congrats. One blowout doesn't substitute 12.Southerndawg said:
