How many days has it been that haie has been been hiding like a bitch?

SFGbob said:
You and I have a different definition of "top tier" Playing in a game to determine who is the National Champ is the "top tier." Beating an 8-4 Purdue team in the Rose Bowl doesn't cut it.
Click to expand...
2000 Miami was probably the best team in the country that year. Axe @creepycoug
 
I will never be denigrate or relitigate 1991 or any other LEGITIMATE voted champion. That’s how we did it. If you don’t respect and love the game, it’s history and it’s champions I don’t know why you’re here. It’s the same reason I laugh about 1966.
Also UW beat *Michigan to win it in 91. I was there.
 
Last edited:
By the end of the year, a lot of people were making the case. Certainly, nobody wanted to play them. They probably had the best wins that year, beating No. 1 FSU who ended 11-2 and No. 2 Va Tech who ended 11-1. Without looking, it's not often you get a shot at #1 and #2 during the season. It was the 2001 team, only with Dan Morgan and Santana Moss. They beat up a 2 loss Florida team in the Sugar in a game with a score as misleading as they come. Miami was Tuff in those days.
I agree with multiple perspectives here. Washington recovers quickly when they recover. Oregon has been more consistent, and you can't write off the Chip era any more than you can write off the Peterman era. Both programs got super lucky with those hires, but then again I am of the opinion that you always get lucky when you get a good one because they are so hard to find and predict.
Some Washington fans have had a harder time than others accepting that Oregon is not some gimmicky flash-in-the-pan program and has established itself as a national power. Some Oregon fans forget their history, or at least choose to. What are you gonna do? As Race said the other day, there are always those fans whose can always find some rationalization for their rivals doing well and for your favorite team doing poorly. Schedules, buying players, class, higher ceiling, higher floor, doing it the right way, better fans, worse fans, piss bottles, wheel chairs, porking lots, Nike, Microsoft, boating, blue bloods, history, we're not trying, you're trying too hard, stadiums, Keith Jackson, standing ovations, etc. etc. etc.
My therapist told me long ago you can't change people.
 
Last edited:
MikeSeaver said:
Why is everyone off of their years and teams today?

Miami was the 2001 season. OSU was 2000.
Clean it up
Click to expand...
Not true. 2000 Miami is the team that UW beat and had a stronger case for being in the Natty game than Florida State (who they beat).
2001 Miami, of course, corn holed UW (thanks a lot Bin Laden) on their way to the Natty.
 
creepycoug said:
By the end of the year, a lot of people were making the case. Certainly, nobody wanted to play them. They probably had the best wins that year, beating No. 1 FSU who ended 11-2 and No. 2 Va Tech who ended 11-1. Without looking, it's not often you get a shot at #1 and #2 during the season. It was the 2001 team, only with Dan Morgan and Santana Moss. They beat up a 2 loss Florida team in the Sugar in a game with a score as misleading as they come. Miami was Tuff in those days.
I agree with multiple perspectives here. Washington recovers quickly when they recover. Oregon has been more consistent, and you can't write off the Chip era any more than you can write off the Peterman era. Both programs got super lucky with those hires, but then again I am of the opinion that you always get lucky when you get a good one because they are so hard to find and predict.
Some Washington fans have had a harder time than others accepting that Oregon is not some gimmicky flash-in-the-pan program and has established itself as a national power. Some Oregon fans forget their history, or at least choose to. What are you gonna do? As Race said the other day, there are always those fans whose can always find some rationalization for their rivals doing well and for your favorite team doing poorly. Schedules, buying players, class, higher ceiling, higher floor, doing it the right way, better fans, worse fans, piss bottles, wheel chairs, porking lots, Nike, Microsoft, boating, blue bloods, history, we're not trying, you're trying too hard, stadiums, Keith Jackson, standing ovations, etc. etc. etc.
My therapist told me long ago you can't change people.
Click to expand...
2009 was the last year I really thought Oregon was not legit, gimmick school. Chippy lost to Pete and Buck.
Whilst watching the 2010 Natty Game I had made my peace with Oregon getting their title only to be saved by Cam.
I don't see a therapist, but might need one if Lanning gets his Natty….lulz.
 
Last edited:
YellowSnow said:
SFGbob said:
You and I have a different definition of "top tier" Playing in a game to determine who is the National Champ is the "top tier." Beating an 8-4 Purdue team in the Rose Bowl doesn't cut it.
Click to expand...
2000 Miami was probably the best team in the country that year. Axe @creepycoug
Click to expand...
Completely agree. But you got then early and you weren't playing in a game to determine who was NC. Hell we beat your ass that year and you know we suck.
 
thechatch said:
Washington beat a few really good teams in 2000.

they also lost to Oregon
hth
Click to expand...

nice-moment.gif
 
YellowSnow said:
creepycoug said:
By the end of the year, a lot of people were making the case. Certainly, nobody wanted to play them. They probably had the best wins that year, beating No. 1 FSU who ended 11-2 and No. 2 Va Tech who ended 11-1. Without looking, it's not often you get a shot at #1 and #2 during the season. It was the 2001 team, only with Dan Morgan and Santana Moss. They beat up a 2 loss Florida team in the Sugar in a game with a score as misleading as they come. Miami was Tuff in those days.
I agree with multiple perspectives here. Washington recovers quickly when they recover. Oregon has been more consistent, and you can't write off the Chip era any more than you can write off the Peterman era. Both programs got super lucky with those hires, but then again I am of the opinion that you always get lucky when you get a good one because they are so hard to find and predict.
Some Washington fans have had a harder time than others accepting that Oregon is not some gimmicky flash-in-the-pan program and has established itself as a national power. Some Oregon fans forget their history, or at least choose to. What are you gonna do? As Race said the other day, there are always those fans whose can always find some rationalization for their rivals doing well and for your favorite team doing poorly. Schedules, buying players, class, higher ceiling, higher floor, doing it the right way, better fans, worse fans, piss bottles, wheel chairs, porking lots, Nike, Microsoft, boating, blue bloods, history, we're not trying, you're trying too hard, stadiums, Keith Jackson, standing ovations, etc. etc. etc.
My therapist told me long ago you can't change people.
Click to expand...
2009 was the last year I really thought Oregon was not legit, gimmick school. Chippy lost to Pete and Buck.
Whilst watching the 2010 Natty Game I had made my peace with Oregon getting their title only to be saved by Cam.
I don't see a therapist, but might need one if Lanning gets his Natty….lulz.
Click to expand...
After a 25 year all out assault by Oregon to try to capture a natty, UW waltzing in and scabbing one last year, in a one year run, would have absolutely obliterated the Oregon fan base into something that would have made Jonestown look silly.
That’s some Trump over Hillary shock and awe shit.

I still shake and vomit just thinking about how close we got to that outcome last year.
 
Last edited:
MikeSeaver said:
I will never be denigrate or relitigate 1991 or any other LEGITIMATE voted champion. That’s how we did it. If you don’t respect and love the game, it’s history and it’s champions I don’t know why you’re here. It’s the same reason I laugh about 1966.
Also UW beat *Michigan to win it in 91. I was there.
Click to expand...
*its
 
MikeSeaver said:
YellowSnow said:
creepycoug said:
By the end of the year, a lot of people were making the case. Certainly, nobody wanted to play them. They probably had the best wins that year, beating No. 1 FSU who ended 11-2 and No. 2 Va Tech who ended 11-1. Without looking, it's not often you get a shot at #1 and #2 during the season. It was the 2001 team, only with Dan Morgan and Santana Moss. They beat up a 2 loss Florida team in the Sugar in a game with a score as misleading as they come. Miami was Tuff in those days.
I agree with multiple perspectives here. Washington recovers quickly when they recover. Oregon has been more consistent, and you can't write off the Chip era any more than you can write off the Peterman era. Both programs got super lucky with those hires, but then again I am of the opinion that you always get lucky when you get a good one because they are so hard to find and predict.
Some Washington fans have had a harder time than others accepting that Oregon is not some gimmicky flash-in-the-pan program and has established itself as a national power. Some Oregon fans forget their history, or at least choose to. What are you gonna do? As Race said the other day, there are always those fans whose can always find some rationalization for their rivals doing well and for your favorite team doing poorly. Schedules, buying players, class, higher ceiling, higher floor, doing it the right way, better fans, worse fans, piss bottles, wheel chairs, porking lots, Nike, Microsoft, boating, blue bloods, history, we're not trying, you're trying too hard, stadiums, Keith Jackson, standing ovations, etc. etc. etc.
My therapist told me long ago you can't change people.
Click to expand...
2009 was the last year I really thought Oregon was not legit, gimmick school. Chippy lost to Pete and Buck.
Whilst watching the 2010 Natty Game I had made my peace with Oregon getting their title only to be saved by Cam.
I don't see a therapist, but might need one if Lanning gets his Natty….lulz.
Click to expand...
After a 25 year all out assault by Oregon to try to capture a natty, UW waltzing in and scabbing one last year, in a one year run, would have absolutely obliterated the Oregon fan base into something that would have made Jonestown look silly.
That’s some Trump over Hillary shock and awe shit.

I still shake and vomit just thinking about how close we got to that outcome last year.
Click to expand...
I was ready to renounce my atheism, and come to Jesus.

But alas, I was proven right that there is no God. Oregon’s impending Natty is further proof.
 
YellowSnow said:
MikeSeaver said:
YellowSnow said:
creepycoug said:
By the end of the year, a lot of people were making the case. Certainly, nobody wanted to play them. They probably had the best wins that year, beating No. 1 FSU who ended 11-2 and No. 2 Va Tech who ended 11-1. Without looking, it's not often you get a shot at #1 and #2 during the season. It was the 2001 team, only with Dan Morgan and Santana Moss. They beat up a 2 loss Florida team in the Sugar in a game with a score as misleading as they come. Miami was Tuff in those days.
I agree with multiple perspectives here. Washington recovers quickly when they recover. Oregon has been more consistent, and you can't write off the Chip era any more than you can write off the Peterman era. Both programs got super lucky with those hires, but then again I am of the opinion that you always get lucky when you get a good one because they are so hard to find and predict.
Some Washington fans have had a harder time than others accepting that Oregon is not some gimmicky flash-in-the-pan program and has established itself as a national power. Some Oregon fans forget their history, or at least choose to. What are you gonna do? As Race said the other day, there are always those fans whose can always find some rationalization for their rivals doing well and for your favorite team doing poorly. Schedules, buying players, class, higher ceiling, higher floor, doing it the right way, better fans, worse fans, piss bottles, wheel chairs, porking lots, Nike, Microsoft, boating, blue bloods, history, we're not trying, you're trying too hard, stadiums, Keith Jackson, standing ovations, etc. etc. etc.
My therapist told me long ago you can't change people.
Click to expand...
2009 was the last year I really thought Oregon was not legit, gimmick school. Chippy lost to Pete and Buck.
Whilst watching the 2010 Natty Game I had made my peace with Oregon getting their title only to be saved by Cam.
I don't see a therapist, but might need one if Lanning gets his Natty….lulz.
Click to expand...
After a 25 year all out assault by Oregon to try to capture a natty, UW waltzing in and scabbing one last year, in a one year run, would have absolutely obliterated the Oregon fan base into something that would have made Jonestown look silly.
That’s some Trump over Hillary shock and awe shit.

I still shake and vomit just thinking about how close we got to that outcome last year.
Click to expand...
I was ready to renounce my atheism, and come to Jesus.

But alas, I was proven right that there is no God. Oregon’s impending Natty is further proof.
Click to expand...
Long way to go.

my nightmare is Texas with Sark winning it.
 
Sark has never bothered me as much as most fans. I wasn't paying a lot of attention anyway when he was here
He was a source of amusement at USC
Did not see Texas coming but beating them the last two years was fine
Long way to say that Texas v Oregon is an easy choice for me. Hook em
 
Sark is the best hope this year. Maybe he's not as awful as most here portray. Maybe the SEC is an overrated pile of dung that rode the coattails of Rural Meyer letting psychos play and Saban. Maybe it's somewhere in the middle
 
RaceBannon said:
Sark has never bothered me as much as most fans. I wasn't paying a lot of attention anyway when he was here
He was a source of amusement at USC
Did not see Texas coming but beating them the last two years was fine
Long way to say that Texas v Oregon is an easy choice for me. Hook em
Click to expand...
I've always been a Sark > Ty guy but that was a very low bar.
I don't suspect Sark 3.0 would be any better at Washington in 2009 than Sark 1.0. He'll never be "elite" in my book and 0-2 against DeBoer is proof enough.
That said, college football is a very different place from where it was 15 years ago, and I think if you give the "sizzle" guys like Sark and/or Lanning enough of budget for a great roster, it's certainly possibly that it might be good enough for a Natty.
To win big at Oregon in 2009, you needed fucking disruptor genius like Chip. Nowadays, a Lanning or Meat type guy with Phil's legal hotdog money will probably suffice.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top