Mario to Miami confirmed

[dnc]

I would argue NIL levels the playing field

And I would argue that you're wrong. I predict that year one of NIL will have taught some marketing/branding firms a good lesson, and we'll quickly stop seeing million dollar deals for two-handoff quarterbacks. With that gone, NIL will become exactly what I predicted: The same system as before, only legal, tax deductible, and injected with serious amounts of rhino cum. NIL equaling a level playing field is the same kind of Randian fantasy as me having the same access to a Koenigsegg Jesko as Bill Gates. I mean, both of us are allowed[/i] to buy one, right?

Just using the example of our little plucky neighbor to the south, when you have an "owner" willing to part with millions to win, you can do things like build an expensive house for players to "rent out" or other such nonsense that used to all happen under the table. WSU's allowed[/i] to do the same thing now, but can they?

...Bruce Snyder did it at Cal. Jeff Tedford did it at Cal. It can be done at Cal unless you're saying the school is more hostile to winning football now than it was then...

I would argue this is exactly the case. I remember Cal's stadium packed and rockin' as Lynch drove the training cart around the field. As I kid, I remember Cal always being a legit contender. The COVID excuses seem lame, but they are true. And I'm no defender of Wilcox, being first (and right) to say he was a mediocre at best DC here when everyone else seems to blow him for his three-consecutive-blowouts-every-season performance.

As for the Great @MikeDamone @chuck War of 2021, I see it both ways: Oregon sells itself more than Warshington right now. Having somebody at Oregon who actually gives a shit about recruiting also matters. The end. I can't remember who all was involved at this point, but it seems like some posters are arguing against Damone's demonstrable three-year recruiting advantage over Petersen by pointing to results on the field/in the draft with those respective players, then others are arguing that Petersen's later classes were better, even though the results on the field for those players tilt way toward Oregon.[/b]

As for @CallMeBigErn, weirdly hostile for just having an opinion that's clearly shared by many people in the biz of college football. I disagree, Wilcox is shit, but I think Ern's probably right for the wrong reason: We're all forgetting that this is all just a simulation to cause UW fans pain. 26 pages of laughing at misfortune later, and we all forget that no matter who Oregon hires, he's going to buttfuck UW anyway, whether it makes sense or not, because that's how the world seems to work lately. Besides, at least a dozen pages of piling on and calling a guy a doog in a 26 page schadenfreude thread about Oregon losing their coach seems awfully ironic. A bit little-brotherish...

Petersens later classes were ranked better than his first 3, but still not as good as Oregon’s. Bottom line is Oregon had higher ranked recruiting classes during the Petersen era regardless who there coach was at Oregon. [/b] Which is MY FUCKING POINT. Oregon has a built in recruiting advantage with Nike/PK. This speaks nothing to the fact that a good coach can overcome this with better player development and coaching.

This isn't true though. Per 247 (your site of choice earlier in this thread)

2018: UW 13th nationally, Oregon 17th
2019: Oregon 9th, UW 10th
2020: UW 12th, Oregon 17th

Three year average: Oregon 14.3, UW 11.6

Umm… check the facts. Per 247. Maybe you were looking at softball. https://247sports.com/college/washington/Season/2019-Football/Commits/

2017. UO 19 UW 22
2018. UO 13 UW 16
2019. UO 7 UW 16
2020. UO 11 UW 16

Facts checked.

Your move.

View attachment 45999
View attachment 46000
View attachment 46001

Might want to check the final rankings vs before recruiting is over.

View attachment 46002
View attachment 46003
View attachment 46004

Also

View attachment 46005
View attachment 46006
View attachment 46007

I know you have been around. Just intuitively does UW out recruiting Oregon pass the sniff test? It doesn’t because it didn’t happen

Your move.

You're looking at composite. When I posted composite rankings (Oregon finished 7th in Helfrich's last year) earlier you counted with 247 (Helfrich finished 5th his last year).

Pick a lane.

 

[LawDawg1]

I would argue NIL levels the playing field

And I would argue that you're wrong. I predict that year one of NIL will have taught some marketing/branding firms a good lesson, and we'll quickly stop seeing million dollar deals for two-handoff quarterbacks. With that gone, NIL will become exactly what I predicted: The same system as before, only legal, tax deductible, and injected with serious amounts of rhino cum. NIL equaling a level playing field is the same kind of Randian fantasy as me having the same access to a Koenigsegg Jesko as Bill Gates. I mean, both of us are allowed[/i] to buy one, right?

Just using the example of our little plucky neighbor to the south, when you have an "owner" willing to part with millions to win, you can do things like build an expensive house for players to "rent out" or other such nonsense that used to all happen under the table. WSU's allowed[/i] to do the same thing now, but can they?

...Bruce Snyder did it at Cal. Jeff Tedford did it at Cal. It can be done at Cal unless you're saying the school is more hostile to winning football now than it was then...

I would argue this is exactly the case. I remember Cal's stadium packed and rockin' as Lynch drove the training cart around the field. As I kid, I remember Cal always being a legit contender. The COVID excuses seem lame, but they are true. And I'm no defender of Wilcox, being first (and right) to say he was a mediocre at best DC here when everyone else seems to blow him for his three-consecutive-blowouts-every-season performance.

As for the Great @MikeDamone @chuck War of 2021, I see it both ways: Oregon sells itself more than Warshington right now. Having somebody at Oregon who actually gives a shit about recruiting also matters. The end. I can't remember who all was involved at this point, but it seems like some posters are arguing against Damone's demonstrable three-year recruiting advantage over Petersen by pointing to results on the field/in the draft with those respective players, then others are arguing that Petersen's later classes were better, even though the results on the field for those players tilt way toward Oregon.[/b]

As for @CallMeBigErn, weirdly hostile for just having an opinion that's clearly shared by many people in the biz of college football. I disagree, Wilcox is shit, but I think Ern's probably right for the wrong reason: We're all forgetting that this is all just a simulation to cause UW fans pain. 26 pages of laughing at misfortune later, and we all forget that no matter who Oregon hires, he's going to buttfuck UW anyway, whether it makes sense or not, because that's how the world seems to work lately. Besides, at least a dozen pages of piling on and calling a guy a doog in a 26 page schadenfreude thread about Oregon losing their coach seems awfully ironic. A bit little-brotherish...

Petersens later classes were ranked better than his first 3, but still not as good as Oregon’s. Bottom line is Oregon had higher ranked recruiting classes during the Petersen era regardless who there coach was at Oregon. [/b] Which is MY FUCKING POINT. Oregon has a built in recruiting advantage with Nike/PK. This speaks nothing to the fact that a good coach can overcome this with better player development and coaching.

This isn't true though. Per 247 (your site of choice earlier in this thread)

2018: UW 13th nationally, Oregon 17th
2019: Oregon 9th, UW 10th
2020: UW 12th, Oregon 17th

Three year average: Oregon 14.3, UW 11.6

Umm… check the facts. Per 247. Maybe you were looking at softball. https://247sports.com/college/washington/Season/2019-Football/Commits/

2017. UO 19 UW 22
2018. UO 13 UW 16
2019. UO 7 UW 16
2020. UO 11 UW 16

Yeah but our recruits sucked.

 

[MikeDamone]

I would argue NIL levels the playing field

And I would argue that you're wrong. I predict that year one of NIL will have taught some marketing/branding firms a good lesson, and we'll quickly stop seeing million dollar deals for two-handoff quarterbacks. With that gone, NIL will become exactly what I predicted: The same system as before, only legal, tax deductible, and injected with serious amounts of rhino cum. NIL equaling a level playing field is the same kind of Randian fantasy as me having the same access to a Koenigsegg Jesko as Bill Gates. I mean, both of us are allowed[/i] to buy one, right?

Just using the example of our little plucky neighbor to the south, when you have an "owner" willing to part with millions to win, you can do things like build an expensive house for players to "rent out" or other such nonsense that used to all happen under the table. WSU's allowed[/i] to do the same thing now, but can they?

...Bruce Snyder did it at Cal. Jeff Tedford did it at Cal. It can be done at Cal unless you're saying the school is more hostile to winning football now than it was then...

I would argue this is exactly the case. I remember Cal's stadium packed and rockin' as Lynch drove the training cart around the field. As I kid, I remember Cal always being a legit contender. The COVID excuses seem lame, but they are true. And I'm no defender of Wilcox, being first (and right) to say he was a mediocre at best DC here when everyone else seems to blow him for his three-consecutive-blowouts-every-season performance.

As for the Great @MikeDamone @chuck War of 2021, I see it both ways: Oregon sells itself more than Warshington right now. Having somebody at Oregon who actually gives a shit about recruiting also matters. The end. I can't remember who all was involved at this point, but it seems like some posters are arguing against Damone's demonstrable three-year recruiting advantage over Petersen by pointing to results on the field/in the draft with those respective players, then others are arguing that Petersen's later classes were better, even though the results on the field for those players tilt way toward Oregon.[/b]

As for @CallMeBigErn, weirdly hostile for just having an opinion that's clearly shared by many people in the biz of college football. I disagree, Wilcox is shit, but I think Ern's probably right for the wrong reason: We're all forgetting that this is all just a simulation to cause UW fans pain. 26 pages of laughing at misfortune later, and we all forget that no matter who Oregon hires, he's going to buttfuck UW anyway, whether it makes sense or not, because that's how the world seems to work lately. Besides, at least a dozen pages of piling on and calling a guy a doog in a 26 page schadenfreude thread about Oregon losing their coach seems awfully ironic. A bit little-brotherish...

Petersens later classes were ranked better than his first 3, but still not as good as Oregon’s. Bottom line is Oregon had higher ranked recruiting classes during the Petersen era regardless who there coach was at Oregon. [/b] Which is MY FUCKING POINT. Oregon has a built in recruiting advantage with Nike/PK. This speaks nothing to the fact that a good coach can overcome this with better player development and coaching.

This isn't true though. Per 247 (your site of choice earlier in this thread)

2018: UW 13th nationally, Oregon 17th
2019: Oregon 9th, UW 10th
2020: UW 12th, Oregon 17th

Three year average: Oregon 14.3, UW 11.6

Umm… check the facts. Per 247. Maybe you were looking at softball. https://247sports.com/college/washington/Season/2019-Football/Commits/

2017. UO 19 UW 22
2018. UO 13 UW 16
2019. UO 7 UW 16
2020. UO 11 UW 16

Facts checked.

Your move.

View attachment 45999
View attachment 46000
View attachment 46001

Might want to check the final rankings vs before recruiting is over.

View attachment 46002
View attachment 46003
View attachment 46004

Also

View attachment 46005
View attachment 46006
View attachment 46007

I know you have been around. Just intuitively does UW out recruiting Oregon pass the sniff test? It doesn’t because it didn’t happen

Your move.

You're looking at composite. When I posted composite rankings (Oregon finished 7th in Helfrich's last year) earlier you counted with 247 (Helfrich finished 5th his last year).

Pick a lane.

His last year Oregon finished 27 nationally and 5th in the pac 12. UW was 29th and 6th.

 

[dnc]

I would argue NIL levels the playing field

And I would argue that you're wrong. I predict that year one of NIL will have taught some marketing/branding firms a good lesson, and we'll quickly stop seeing million dollar deals for two-handoff quarterbacks. With that gone, NIL will become exactly what I predicted: The same system as before, only legal, tax deductible, and injected with serious amounts of rhino cum. NIL equaling a level playing field is the same kind of Randian fantasy as me having the same access to a Koenigsegg Jesko as Bill Gates. I mean, both of us are allowed[/i] to buy one, right?

Just using the example of our little plucky neighbor to the south, when you have an "owner" willing to part with millions to win, you can do things like build an expensive house for players to "rent out" or other such nonsense that used to all happen under the table. WSU's allowed[/i] to do the same thing now, but can they?

...Bruce Snyder did it at Cal. Jeff Tedford did it at Cal. It can be done at Cal unless you're saying the school is more hostile to winning football now than it was then...

I would argue this is exactly the case. I remember Cal's stadium packed and rockin' as Lynch drove the training cart around the field. As I kid, I remember Cal always being a legit contender. The COVID excuses seem lame, but they are true. And I'm no defender of Wilcox, being first (and right) to say he was a mediocre at best DC here when everyone else seems to blow him for his three-consecutive-blowouts-every-season performance.

As for the Great @MikeDamone @chuck War of 2021, I see it both ways: Oregon sells itself more than Warshington right now. Having somebody at Oregon who actually gives a shit about recruiting also matters. The end. I can't remember who all was involved at this point, but it seems like some posters are arguing against Damone's demonstrable three-year recruiting advantage over Petersen by pointing to results on the field/in the draft with those respective players, then others are arguing that Petersen's later classes were better, even though the results on the field for those players tilt way toward Oregon.[/b]

As for @CallMeBigErn, weirdly hostile for just having an opinion that's clearly shared by many people in the biz of college football. I disagree, Wilcox is shit, but I think Ern's probably right for the wrong reason: We're all forgetting that this is all just a simulation to cause UW fans pain. 26 pages of laughing at misfortune later, and we all forget that no matter who Oregon hires, he's going to buttfuck UW anyway, whether it makes sense or not, because that's how the world seems to work lately. Besides, at least a dozen pages of piling on and calling a guy a doog in a 26 page schadenfreude thread about Oregon losing their coach seems awfully ironic. A bit little-brotherish...

Petersens later classes were ranked better than his first 3, but still not as good as Oregon’s. Bottom line is Oregon had higher ranked recruiting classes during the Petersen era regardless who there coach was at Oregon. [/b] Which is MY FUCKING POINT. Oregon has a built in recruiting advantage with Nike/PK. This speaks nothing to the fact that a good coach can overcome this with better player development and coaching.

This isn't true though. Per 247 (your site of choice earlier in this thread)

2018: UW 13th nationally, Oregon 17th
2019: Oregon 9th, UW 10th
2020: UW 12th, Oregon 17th

Three year average: Oregon 14.3, UW 11.6

Umm… check the facts. Per 247. Maybe you were looking at softball. https://247sports.com/college/washington/Season/2019-Football/Commits/

2017. UO 19 UW 22
2018. UO 13 UW 16
2019. UO 7 UW 16
2020. UO 11 UW 16

Facts checked.

Your move.

View attachment 45999
View attachment 46000
View attachment 46001

Might want to check the final rankings vs before recruiting is over.

View attachment 46002
View attachment 46003
View attachment 46004

Also

View attachment 46005
View attachment 46006
View attachment 46007

I know you have been around. Just intuitively does UW out recruiting Oregon pass the sniff test? It doesn’t because it didn’t happen

Your move.

You're looking at composite. When I posted composite rankings (Oregon finished 7th in Helfrich's last year) earlier you counted with 247 (Helfrich finished 5th his last year).

Pick a lane.

His last year Oregon finished 27 nationally and 5th in the pac 12. UW was 29th and 6th.

View attachment 46009

I was looking at this.

Whatever, it doesn't matter. The differences between 247 and composite aren't stark enough to make any huge difference.

We'll go with your metric. Bottom line doesn't change anything I said. If 27th is Oregon recruiting itself I'm just fine with Oregon recruiting itself.

 

[creepycoug]

http://twitter.com/BillyCorben/status/1467899700229648388?s=20

@creepycoug

View attachment 3128

 

[MikeDamone]

I would argue NIL levels the playing field

And I would argue that you're wrong. I predict that year one of NIL will have taught some marketing/branding firms a good lesson, and we'll quickly stop seeing million dollar deals for two-handoff quarterbacks. With that gone, NIL will become exactly what I predicted: The same system as before, only legal, tax deductible, and injected with serious amounts of rhino cum. NIL equaling a level playing field is the same kind of Randian fantasy as me having the same access to a Koenigsegg Jesko as Bill Gates. I mean, both of us are allowed[/i] to buy one, right?

Just using the example of our little plucky neighbor to the south, when you have an "owner" willing to part with millions to win, you can do things like build an expensive house for players to "rent out" or other such nonsense that used to all happen under the table. WSU's allowed[/i] to do the same thing now, but can they?

...Bruce Snyder did it at Cal. Jeff Tedford did it at Cal. It can be done at Cal unless you're saying the school is more hostile to winning football now than it was then...

I would argue this is exactly the case. I remember Cal's stadium packed and rockin' as Lynch drove the training cart around the field. As I kid, I remember Cal always being a legit contender. The COVID excuses seem lame, but they are true. And I'm no defender of Wilcox, being first (and right) to say he was a mediocre at best DC here when everyone else seems to blow him for his three-consecutive-blowouts-every-season performance.

As for the Great @MikeDamone @chuck War of 2021, I see it both ways: Oregon sells itself more than Warshington right now. Having somebody at Oregon who actually gives a shit about recruiting also matters. The end. I can't remember who all was involved at this point, but it seems like some posters are arguing against Damone's demonstrable three-year recruiting advantage over Petersen by pointing to results on the field/in the draft with those respective players, then others are arguing that Petersen's later classes were better, even though the results on the field for those players tilt way toward Oregon.[/b]

As for @CallMeBigErn, weirdly hostile for just having an opinion that's clearly shared by many people in the biz of college football. I disagree, Wilcox is shit, but I think Ern's probably right for the wrong reason: We're all forgetting that this is all just a simulation to cause UW fans pain. 26 pages of laughing at misfortune later, and we all forget that no matter who Oregon hires, he's going to buttfuck UW anyway, whether it makes sense or not, because that's how the world seems to work lately. Besides, at least a dozen pages of piling on and calling a guy a doog in a 26 page schadenfreude thread about Oregon losing their coach seems awfully ironic. A bit little-brotherish...

Petersens later classes were ranked better than his first 3, but still not as good as Oregon’s. Bottom line is Oregon had higher ranked recruiting classes during the Petersen era regardless who there coach was at Oregon. [/b] Which is MY FUCKING POINT. Oregon has a built in recruiting advantage with Nike/PK. This speaks nothing to the fact that a good coach can overcome this with better player development and coaching.

This isn't true though. Per 247 (your site of choice earlier in this thread)

2018: UW 13th nationally, Oregon 17th
2019: Oregon 9th, UW 10th
2020: UW 12th, Oregon 17th

Three year average: Oregon 14.3, UW 11.6

Umm… check the facts. Per 247. Maybe you were looking at softball. https://247sports.com/college/washington/Season/2019-Football/Commits/

2017. UO 19 UW 22
2018. UO 13 UW 16
2019. UO 7 UW 16
2020. UO 11 UW 16

Yeah but our recruits sucked.

I never said that dipshit. Petersen recruited well. But Oregon out recruited him consistently and that’s due to Nike. Oregon had inferior coaches. How the fuck is this so hard for you dumb fucks to understand? Whoever Oregon gets, he will magically be a “great recruiter”.

 

[MikeDamone]

I would argue NIL levels the playing field

And I would argue that you're wrong. I predict that year one of NIL will have taught some marketing/branding firms a good lesson, and we'll quickly stop seeing million dollar deals for two-handoff quarterbacks. With that gone, NIL will become exactly what I predicted: The same system as before, only legal, tax deductible, and injected with serious amounts of rhino cum. NIL equaling a level playing field is the same kind of Randian fantasy as me having the same access to a Koenigsegg Jesko as Bill Gates. I mean, both of us are allowed[/i] to buy one, right?

Just using the example of our little plucky neighbor to the south, when you have an "owner" willing to part with millions to win, you can do things like build an expensive house for players to "rent out" or other such nonsense that used to all happen under the table. WSU's allowed[/i] to do the same thing now, but can they?

...Bruce Snyder did it at Cal. Jeff Tedford did it at Cal. It can be done at Cal unless you're saying the school is more hostile to winning football now than it was then...

I would argue this is exactly the case. I remember Cal's stadium packed and rockin' as Lynch drove the training cart around the field. As I kid, I remember Cal always being a legit contender. The COVID excuses seem lame, but they are true. And I'm no defender of Wilcox, being first (and right) to say he was a mediocre at best DC here when everyone else seems to blow him for his three-consecutive-blowouts-every-season performance.

As for the Great @MikeDamone @chuck War of 2021, I see it both ways: Oregon sells itself more than Warshington right now. Having somebody at Oregon who actually gives a shit about recruiting also matters. The end. I can't remember who all was involved at this point, but it seems like some posters are arguing against Damone's demonstrable three-year recruiting advantage over Petersen by pointing to results on the field/in the draft with those respective players, then others are arguing that Petersen's later classes were better, even though the results on the field for those players tilt way toward Oregon.[/b]

As for @CallMeBigErn, weirdly hostile for just having an opinion that's clearly shared by many people in the biz of college football. I disagree, Wilcox is shit, but I think Ern's probably right for the wrong reason: We're all forgetting that this is all just a simulation to cause UW fans pain. 26 pages of laughing at misfortune later, and we all forget that no matter who Oregon hires, he's going to buttfuck UW anyway, whether it makes sense or not, because that's how the world seems to work lately. Besides, at least a dozen pages of piling on and calling a guy a doog in a 26 page schadenfreude thread about Oregon losing their coach seems awfully ironic. A bit little-brotherish...

Petersens later classes were ranked better than his first 3, but still not as good as Oregon’s. Bottom line is Oregon had higher ranked recruiting classes during the Petersen era regardless who there coach was at Oregon. [/b] Which is MY FUCKING POINT. Oregon has a built in recruiting advantage with Nike/PK. This speaks nothing to the fact that a good coach can overcome this with better player development and coaching.

This isn't true though. Per 247 (your site of choice earlier in this thread)

2018: UW 13th nationally, Oregon 17th
2019: Oregon 9th, UW 10th
2020: UW 12th, Oregon 17th

Three year average: Oregon 14.3, UW 11.6

Umm… check the facts. Per 247. Maybe you were looking at softball. https://247sports.com/college/washington/Season/2019-Football/Commits/

2017. UO 19 UW 22
2018. UO 13 UW 16
2019. UO 7 UW 16
2020. UO 11 UW 16

Facts checked.

Your move.

View attachment 45999
View attachment 46000
View attachment 46001

Might want to check the final rankings vs before recruiting is over.

View attachment 46002
View attachment 46003
View attachment 46004

Also

View attachment 46005
View attachment 46006
View attachment 46007

I know you have been around. Just intuitively does UW out recruiting Oregon pass the sniff test? It doesn’t because it didn’t happen

Your move.

You're looking at composite. When I posted composite rankings (Oregon finished 7th in Helfrich's last year) earlier you counted with 247 (Helfrich finished 5th his last year).

Pick a lane.

His last year Oregon finished 27 nationally and 5th in the pac 12. UW was 29th and 6th.

View attachment 46009

I was looking at this.

Whatever, it doesn't matter. The differences between 247 and composite aren't stark enough to make any huge difference.

We'll go with your metric. Bottom line doesn't change anything I said. If 27th is Oregon recruiting itself I'm just fine with Oregon recruiting itself.

View attachment 46010

Helfrich’s last year was their floor. Which was higher than UWs floor. Expect the trend to continue. A dumbass on his last legs out recruited UW. It’s the Nike factor.

 

[insinceredawg]

https://twitter.com/RedditCFB/status/1467901107401723907

 

[BleachedAnusDawg]

I would argue NIL levels the playing field

And I would argue that you're wrong. I predict that year one of NIL will have taught some marketing/branding firms a good lesson, and we'll quickly stop seeing million dollar deals for two-handoff quarterbacks. With that gone, NIL will become exactly what I predicted: The same system as before, only legal, tax deductible, and injected with serious amounts of rhino cum. NIL equaling a level playing field is the same kind of Randian fantasy as me having the same access to a Koenigsegg Jesko as Bill Gates. I mean, both of us are allowed[/i] to buy one, right?

Just using the example of our little plucky neighbor to the south, when you have an "owner" willing to part with millions to win, you can do things like build an expensive house for players to "rent out" or other such nonsense that used to all happen under the table. WSU's allowed[/i] to do the same thing now, but can they?

...Bruce Snyder did it at Cal. Jeff Tedford did it at Cal. It can be done at Cal unless you're saying the school is more hostile to winning football now than it was then...

I would argue this is exactly the case. I remember Cal's stadium packed and rockin' as Lynch drove the training cart around the field. As I kid, I remember Cal always being a legit contender. The COVID excuses seem lame, but they are true. And I'm no defender of Wilcox, being first (and right) to say he was a mediocre at best DC here when everyone else seems to blow him for his three-consecutive-blowouts-every-season performance.

As for the Great @MikeDamone @chuck War of 2021, I see it both ways: Oregon sells itself more than Warshington right now. Having somebody at Oregon who actually gives a shit about recruiting also matters. The end. I can't remember who all was involved at this point, but it seems like some posters are arguing against Damone's demonstrable three-year recruiting advantage over Petersen by pointing to results on the field/in the draft with those respective players, then others are arguing that Petersen's later classes were better, even though the results on the field for those players tilt way toward Oregon.[/b]

As for @CallMeBigErn, weirdly hostile for just having an opinion that's clearly shared by many people in the biz of college football. I disagree, Wilcox is shit, but I think Ern's probably right for the wrong reason: We're all forgetting that this is all just a simulation to cause UW fans pain. 26 pages of laughing at misfortune later, and we all forget that no matter who Oregon hires, he's going to buttfuck UW anyway, whether it makes sense or not, because that's how the world seems to work lately. Besides, at least a dozen pages of piling on and calling a guy a doog in a 26 page schadenfreude thread about Oregon losing their coach seems awfully ironic. A bit little-brotherish...

Petersens later classes were ranked better than his first 3, but still not as good as Oregon’s. Bottom line is Oregon had higher ranked recruiting classes during the Petersen era regardless who there coach was at Oregon. [/b] Which is MY FUCKING POINT. Oregon has a built in recruiting advantage with Nike/PK. This speaks nothing to the fact that a good coach can overcome this with better player development and coaching.

This isn't true though. Per 247 (your site of choice earlier in this thread)

2018: UW 13th nationally, Oregon 17th
2019: Oregon 9th, UW 10th
2020: UW 12th, Oregon 17th

Three year average: Oregon 14.3, UW 11.6

Umm… check the facts. Per 247. Maybe you were looking at softball. https://247sports.com/college/washington/Season/2019-Football/Commits/

2017. UO 19 UW 22
2018. UO 13 UW 16
2019. UO 7 UW 16
2020. UO 11 UW 16

Yeah but our recruits sucked.

I never said that dipshit. Petersen recruited well. But Oregon out recruited him consistently and that’s due to Nike. Oregon had inferior coaches. How the fuck is this so hard for you dumb fucks to understand? Whoever Oregon gets, he will magically be a “great recruiter”.

I notice that you are ignoring the fact that, per player, UW was getting higher rated recruits than Oregon.

 

[TheHB]

http://twitter.com/BillyCorben/status/1467899700229648388?s=20

@creepycoug

 

[MikeDamone]

I would argue NIL levels the playing field

And I would argue that you're wrong. I predict that year one of NIL will have taught some marketing/branding firms a good lesson, and we'll quickly stop seeing million dollar deals for two-handoff quarterbacks. With that gone, NIL will become exactly what I predicted: The same system as before, only legal, tax deductible, and injected with serious amounts of rhino cum. NIL equaling a level playing field is the same kind of Randian fantasy as me having the same access to a Koenigsegg Jesko as Bill Gates. I mean, both of us are allowed[/i] to buy one, right?

Just using the example of our little plucky neighbor to the south, when you have an "owner" willing to part with millions to win, you can do things like build an expensive house for players to "rent out" or other such nonsense that used to all happen under the table. WSU's allowed[/i] to do the same thing now, but can they?

...Bruce Snyder did it at Cal. Jeff Tedford did it at Cal. It can be done at Cal unless you're saying the school is more hostile to winning football now than it was then...

I would argue this is exactly the case. I remember Cal's stadium packed and rockin' as Lynch drove the training cart around the field. As I kid, I remember Cal always being a legit contender. The COVID excuses seem lame, but they are true. And I'm no defender of Wilcox, being first (and right) to say he was a mediocre at best DC here when everyone else seems to blow him for his three-consecutive-blowouts-every-season performance.

As for the Great @MikeDamone @chuck War of 2021, I see it both ways: Oregon sells itself more than Warshington right now. Having somebody at Oregon who actually gives a shit about recruiting also matters. The end. I can't remember who all was involved at this point, but it seems like some posters are arguing against Damone's demonstrable three-year recruiting advantage over Petersen by pointing to results on the field/in the draft with those respective players, then others are arguing that Petersen's later classes were better, even though the results on the field for those players tilt way toward Oregon.[/b]

As for @CallMeBigErn, weirdly hostile for just having an opinion that's clearly shared by many people in the biz of college football. I disagree, Wilcox is shit, but I think Ern's probably right for the wrong reason: We're all forgetting that this is all just a simulation to cause UW fans pain. 26 pages of laughing at misfortune later, and we all forget that no matter who Oregon hires, he's going to buttfuck UW anyway, whether it makes sense or not, because that's how the world seems to work lately. Besides, at least a dozen pages of piling on and calling a guy a doog in a 26 page schadenfreude thread about Oregon losing their coach seems awfully ironic. A bit little-brotherish...

Petersens later classes were ranked better than his first 3, but still not as good as Oregon’s. Bottom line is Oregon had higher ranked recruiting classes during the Petersen era regardless who there coach was at Oregon. [/b] Which is MY FUCKING POINT. Oregon has a built in recruiting advantage with Nike/PK. This speaks nothing to the fact that a good coach can overcome this with better player development and coaching.

This isn't true though. Per 247 (your site of choice earlier in this thread)

2018: UW 13th nationally, Oregon 17th
2019: Oregon 9th, UW 10th
2020: UW 12th, Oregon 17th

Three year average: Oregon 14.3, UW 11.6

Umm… check the facts. Per 247. Maybe you were looking at softball. https://247sports.com/college/washington/Season/2019-Football/Commits/

2017. UO 19 UW 22
2018. UO 13 UW 16
2019. UO 7 UW 16
2020. UO 11 UW 16

Yeah but our recruits sucked.

I never said that dipshit. Petersen recruited well. But Oregon out recruited him consistently and that’s due to Nike. Oregon had inferior coaches. How the fuck is this so hard for you dumb fucks to understand? Whoever Oregon gets, he will magically be a “great recruiter”.

I notice that you are ignoring the fact that, per player, UW was getting higher rated recruits than Oregon.

JFC A bunch of fucking doogs around here. If you look at it just right in a certain angle, UW out recruited Oregon.

 

[LawDawg1]

I would argue NIL levels the playing field

And I would argue that you're wrong. I predict that year one of NIL will have taught some marketing/branding firms a good lesson, and we'll quickly stop seeing million dollar deals for two-handoff quarterbacks. With that gone, NIL will become exactly what I predicted: The same system as before, only legal, tax deductible, and injected with serious amounts of rhino cum. NIL equaling a level playing field is the same kind of Randian fantasy as me having the same access to a Koenigsegg Jesko as Bill Gates. I mean, both of us are allowed[/i] to buy one, right?

Just using the example of our little plucky neighbor to the south, when you have an "owner" willing to part with millions to win, you can do things like build an expensive house for players to "rent out" or other such nonsense that used to all happen under the table. WSU's allowed[/i] to do the same thing now, but can they?

...Bruce Snyder did it at Cal. Jeff Tedford did it at Cal. It can be done at Cal unless you're saying the school is more hostile to winning football now than it was then...

I would argue this is exactly the case. I remember Cal's stadium packed and rockin' as Lynch drove the training cart around the field. As I kid, I remember Cal always being a legit contender. The COVID excuses seem lame, but they are true. And I'm no defender of Wilcox, being first (and right) to say he was a mediocre at best DC here when everyone else seems to blow him for his three-consecutive-blowouts-every-season performance.

As for the Great @MikeDamone @chuck War of 2021, I see it both ways: Oregon sells itself more than Warshington right now. Having somebody at Oregon who actually gives a shit about recruiting also matters. The end. I can't remember who all was involved at this point, but it seems like some posters are arguing against Damone's demonstrable three-year recruiting advantage over Petersen by pointing to results on the field/in the draft with those respective players, then others are arguing that Petersen's later classes were better, even though the results on the field for those players tilt way toward Oregon.[/b]

As for @CallMeBigErn, weirdly hostile for just having an opinion that's clearly shared by many people in the biz of college football. I disagree, Wilcox is shit, but I think Ern's probably right for the wrong reason: We're all forgetting that this is all just a simulation to cause UW fans pain. 26 pages of laughing at misfortune later, and we all forget that no matter who Oregon hires, he's going to buttfuck UW anyway, whether it makes sense or not, because that's how the world seems to work lately. Besides, at least a dozen pages of piling on and calling a guy a doog in a 26 page schadenfreude thread about Oregon losing their coach seems awfully ironic. A bit little-brotherish...

Petersens later classes were ranked better than his first 3, but still not as good as Oregon’s. Bottom line is Oregon had higher ranked recruiting classes during the Petersen era regardless who there coach was at Oregon. [/b] Which is MY FUCKING POINT. Oregon has a built in recruiting advantage with Nike/PK. This speaks nothing to the fact that a good coach can overcome this with better player development and coaching.

This isn't true though. Per 247 (your site of choice earlier in this thread)

2018: UW 13th nationally, Oregon 17th
2019: Oregon 9th, UW 10th
2020: UW 12th, Oregon 17th

Three year average: Oregon 14.3, UW 11.6

Umm… check the facts. Per 247. Maybe you were looking at softball. https://247sports.com/college/washington/Season/2019-Football/Commits/

2017. UO 19 UW 22
2018. UO 13 UW 16
2019. UO 7 UW 16
2020. UO 11 UW 16

Yeah but our recruits sucked.

I never said that dipshit. Petersen recruited well. But Oregon out recruited him consistently and that’s due to Nike. Oregon had inferior coaches. How the fuck is this so hard for you dumb fucks to understand? Whoever Oregon gets, he will magically be a “great recruiter”.

Sensitive. And incorrectly reading into things. Solid take though.

 

[MikeDamone]

I would argue NIL levels the playing field

And I would argue that you're wrong. I predict that year one of NIL will have taught some marketing/branding firms a good lesson, and we'll quickly stop seeing million dollar deals for two-handoff quarterbacks. With that gone, NIL will become exactly what I predicted: The same system as before, only legal, tax deductible, and injected with serious amounts of rhino cum. NIL equaling a level playing field is the same kind of Randian fantasy as me having the same access to a Koenigsegg Jesko as Bill Gates. I mean, both of us are allowed[/i] to buy one, right?

Just using the example of our little plucky neighbor to the south, when you have an "owner" willing to part with millions to win, you can do things like build an expensive house for players to "rent out" or other such nonsense that used to all happen under the table. WSU's allowed[/i] to do the same thing now, but can they?

...Bruce Snyder did it at Cal. Jeff Tedford did it at Cal. It can be done at Cal unless you're saying the school is more hostile to winning football now than it was then...

I would argue this is exactly the case. I remember Cal's stadium packed and rockin' as Lynch drove the training cart around the field. As I kid, I remember Cal always being a legit contender. The COVID excuses seem lame, but they are true. And I'm no defender of Wilcox, being first (and right) to say he was a mediocre at best DC here when everyone else seems to blow him for his three-consecutive-blowouts-every-season performance.

As for the Great @MikeDamone @chuck War of 2021, I see it both ways: Oregon sells itself more than Warshington right now. Having somebody at Oregon who actually gives a shit about recruiting also matters. The end. I can't remember who all was involved at this point, but it seems like some posters are arguing against Damone's demonstrable three-year recruiting advantage over Petersen by pointing to results on the field/in the draft with those respective players, then others are arguing that Petersen's later classes were better, even though the results on the field for those players tilt way toward Oregon.[/b]

As for @CallMeBigErn, weirdly hostile for just having an opinion that's clearly shared by many people in the biz of college football. I disagree, Wilcox is shit, but I think Ern's probably right for the wrong reason: We're all forgetting that this is all just a simulation to cause UW fans pain. 26 pages of laughing at misfortune later, and we all forget that no matter who Oregon hires, he's going to buttfuck UW anyway, whether it makes sense or not, because that's how the world seems to work lately. Besides, at least a dozen pages of piling on and calling a guy a doog in a 26 page schadenfreude thread about Oregon losing their coach seems awfully ironic. A bit little-brotherish...

Petersens later classes were ranked better than his first 3, but still not as good as Oregon’s. Bottom line is Oregon had higher ranked recruiting classes during the Petersen era regardless who there coach was at Oregon. [/b] Which is MY FUCKING POINT. Oregon has a built in recruiting advantage with Nike/PK. This speaks nothing to the fact that a good coach can overcome this with better player development and coaching.

This isn't true though. Per 247 (your site of choice earlier in this thread)

2018: UW 13th nationally, Oregon 17th
2019: Oregon 9th, UW 10th
2020: UW 12th, Oregon 17th

Three year average: Oregon 14.3, UW 11.6

Umm… check the facts. Per 247. Maybe you were looking at softball. https://247sports.com/college/washington/Season/2019-Football/Commits/

2017. UO 19 UW 22
2018. UO 13 UW 16
2019. UO 7 UW 16
2020. UO 11 UW 16

Yeah but our recruits sucked.

I never said that dipshit. Petersen recruited well. But Oregon out recruited him consistently and that’s due to Nike. Oregon had inferior coaches. How the fuck is this so hard for you dumb fucks to understand? Whoever Oregon gets, he will magically be a “great recruiter”.

Sensitive. And incorrectly reading into things. Solid take though.

You had no point. So fuck off.

 

[LawDawg1]

I would argue NIL levels the playing field

And I would argue that you're wrong. I predict that year one of NIL will have taught some marketing/branding firms a good lesson, and we'll quickly stop seeing million dollar deals for two-handoff quarterbacks. With that gone, NIL will become exactly what I predicted: The same system as before, only legal, tax deductible, and injected with serious amounts of rhino cum. NIL equaling a level playing field is the same kind of Randian fantasy as me having the same access to a Koenigsegg Jesko as Bill Gates. I mean, both of us are allowed[/i] to buy one, right?

Just using the example of our little plucky neighbor to the south, when you have an "owner" willing to part with millions to win, you can do things like build an expensive house for players to "rent out" or other such nonsense that used to all happen under the table. WSU's allowed[/i] to do the same thing now, but can they?

...Bruce Snyder did it at Cal. Jeff Tedford did it at Cal. It can be done at Cal unless you're saying the school is more hostile to winning football now than it was then...

I would argue this is exactly the case. I remember Cal's stadium packed and rockin' as Lynch drove the training cart around the field. As I kid, I remember Cal always being a legit contender. The COVID excuses seem lame, but they are true. And I'm no defender of Wilcox, being first (and right) to say he was a mediocre at best DC here when everyone else seems to blow him for his three-consecutive-blowouts-every-season performance.

As for the Great @MikeDamone @chuck War of 2021, I see it both ways: Oregon sells itself more than Warshington right now. Having somebody at Oregon who actually gives a shit about recruiting also matters. The end. I can't remember who all was involved at this point, but it seems like some posters are arguing against Damone's demonstrable three-year recruiting advantage over Petersen by pointing to results on the field/in the draft with those respective players, then others are arguing that Petersen's later classes were better, even though the results on the field for those players tilt way toward Oregon.[/b]

As for @CallMeBigErn, weirdly hostile for just having an opinion that's clearly shared by many people in the biz of college football. I disagree, Wilcox is shit, but I think Ern's probably right for the wrong reason: We're all forgetting that this is all just a simulation to cause UW fans pain. 26 pages of laughing at misfortune later, and we all forget that no matter who Oregon hires, he's going to buttfuck UW anyway, whether it makes sense or not, because that's how the world seems to work lately. Besides, at least a dozen pages of piling on and calling a guy a doog in a 26 page schadenfreude thread about Oregon losing their coach seems awfully ironic. A bit little-brotherish...

Petersens later classes were ranked better than his first 3, but still not as good as Oregon’s. Bottom line is Oregon had higher ranked recruiting classes during the Petersen era regardless who there coach was at Oregon. [/b] Which is MY FUCKING POINT. Oregon has a built in recruiting advantage with Nike/PK. This speaks nothing to the fact that a good coach can overcome this with better player development and coaching.

This isn't true though. Per 247 (your site of choice earlier in this thread)

2018: UW 13th nationally, Oregon 17th
2019: Oregon 9th, UW 10th
2020: UW 12th, Oregon 17th

Three year average: Oregon 14.3, UW 11.6

Umm… check the facts. Per 247. Maybe you were looking at softball. https://247sports.com/college/washington/Season/2019-Football/Commits/

2017. UO 19 UW 22
2018. UO 13 UW 16
2019. UO 7 UW 16
2020. UO 11 UW 16

Yeah but our recruits sucked.

I never said that dipshit. Petersen recruited well. But Oregon out recruited him consistently and that’s due to Nike. Oregon had inferior coaches. How the fuck is this so hard for you dumb fucks to understand? Whoever Oregon gets, he will magically be a “great recruiter”.

Sensitive. And incorrectly reading into things. Solid take though.

You had no point. So fuck off.

Since when was that ever required hear?

 

[dnc]

I would argue NIL levels the playing field

And I would argue that you're wrong. I predict that year one of NIL will have taught some marketing/branding firms a good lesson, and we'll quickly stop seeing million dollar deals for two-handoff quarterbacks. With that gone, NIL will become exactly what I predicted: The same system as before, only legal, tax deductible, and injected with serious amounts of rhino cum. NIL equaling a level playing field is the same kind of Randian fantasy as me having the same access to a Koenigsegg Jesko as Bill Gates. I mean, both of us are allowed[/i] to buy one, right?

Just using the example of our little plucky neighbor to the south, when you have an "owner" willing to part with millions to win, you can do things like build an expensive house for players to "rent out" or other such nonsense that used to all happen under the table. WSU's allowed[/i] to do the same thing now, but can they?

...Bruce Snyder did it at Cal. Jeff Tedford did it at Cal. It can be done at Cal unless you're saying the school is more hostile to winning football now than it was then...

I would argue this is exactly the case. I remember Cal's stadium packed and rockin' as Lynch drove the training cart around the field. As I kid, I remember Cal always being a legit contender. The COVID excuses seem lame, but they are true. And I'm no defender of Wilcox, being first (and right) to say he was a mediocre at best DC here when everyone else seems to blow him for his three-consecutive-blowouts-every-season performance.

As for the Great @MikeDamone @chuck War of 2021, I see it both ways: Oregon sells itself more than Warshington right now. Having somebody at Oregon who actually gives a shit about recruiting also matters. The end. I can't remember who all was involved at this point, but it seems like some posters are arguing against Damone's demonstrable three-year recruiting advantage over Petersen by pointing to results on the field/in the draft with those respective players, then others are arguing that Petersen's later classes were better, even though the results on the field for those players tilt way toward Oregon.[/b]

As for @CallMeBigErn, weirdly hostile for just having an opinion that's clearly shared by many people in the biz of college football. I disagree, Wilcox is shit, but I think Ern's probably right for the wrong reason: We're all forgetting that this is all just a simulation to cause UW fans pain. 26 pages of laughing at misfortune later, and we all forget that no matter who Oregon hires, he's going to buttfuck UW anyway, whether it makes sense or not, because that's how the world seems to work lately. Besides, at least a dozen pages of piling on and calling a guy a doog in a 26 page schadenfreude thread about Oregon losing their coach seems awfully ironic. A bit little-brotherish...

Petersens later classes were ranked better than his first 3, but still not as good as Oregon’s. Bottom line is Oregon had higher ranked recruiting classes during the Petersen era regardless who there coach was at Oregon. [/b] Which is MY FUCKING POINT. Oregon has a built in recruiting advantage with Nike/PK. This speaks nothing to the fact that a good coach can overcome this with better player development and coaching.

This isn't true though. Per 247 (your site of choice earlier in this thread)

2018: UW 13th nationally, Oregon 17th
2019: Oregon 9th, UW 10th
2020: UW 12th, Oregon 17th

Three year average: Oregon 14.3, UW 11.6

Umm… check the facts. Per 247. Maybe you were looking at softball. https://247sports.com/college/washington/Season/2019-Football/Commits/

2017. UO 19 UW 22
2018. UO 13 UW 16
2019. UO 7 UW 16
2020. UO 11 UW 16

Facts checked.

Your move.

View attachment 45999
View attachment 46000
View attachment 46001

Might want to check the final rankings vs before recruiting is over.

View attachment 46002
View attachment 46003
View attachment 46004

Also

View attachment 46005
View attachment 46006
View attachment 46007

I know you have been around. Just intuitively does UW out recruiting Oregon pass the sniff test? It doesn’t because it didn’t happen

Your move.

You're looking at composite. When I posted composite rankings (Oregon finished 7th in Helfrich's last year) earlier you counted with 247 (Helfrich finished 5th his last year).

Pick a lane.

His last year Oregon finished 27 nationally and 5th in the pac 12. UW was 29th and 6th.

View attachment 46009

I was looking at this.

Whatever, it doesn't matter. The differences between 247 and composite aren't stark enough to make any huge difference.

We'll go with your metric. Bottom line doesn't change anything I said. If 27th is Oregon recruiting itself I'm just fine with Oregon recruiting itself.

View attachment 46010

Helfrich’s last year was their floor. Which was higher than UWs floor. Expect the trend to continue. A dumbass on his last legs out recruited UW. It’s the Nike factor.

If all were arguing is that their recruiting floor is higher than ours then I agree with you.

I just don’t think that’s especially important.

You said earlier their floor is higher than our ceiling which is simply not true.

 

[BleachedAnusDawg]

I would argue NIL levels the playing field

And I would argue that you're wrong. I predict that year one of NIL will have taught some marketing/branding firms a good lesson, and we'll quickly stop seeing million dollar deals for two-handoff quarterbacks. With that gone, NIL will become exactly what I predicted: The same system as before, only legal, tax deductible, and injected with serious amounts of rhino cum. NIL equaling a level playing field is the same kind of Randian fantasy as me having the same access to a Koenigsegg Jesko as Bill Gates. I mean, both of us are allowed[/i] to buy one, right?

Just using the example of our little plucky neighbor to the south, when you have an "owner" willing to part with millions to win, you can do things like build an expensive house for players to "rent out" or other such nonsense that used to all happen under the table. WSU's allowed[/i] to do the same thing now, but can they?

...Bruce Snyder did it at Cal. Jeff Tedford did it at Cal. It can be done at Cal unless you're saying the school is more hostile to winning football now than it was then...

I would argue this is exactly the case. I remember Cal's stadium packed and rockin' as Lynch drove the training cart around the field. As I kid, I remember Cal always being a legit contender. The COVID excuses seem lame, but they are true. And I'm no defender of Wilcox, being first (and right) to say he was a mediocre at best DC here when everyone else seems to blow him for his three-consecutive-blowouts-every-season performance.

As for the Great @MikeDamone @chuck War of 2021, I see it both ways: Oregon sells itself more than Warshington right now. Having somebody at Oregon who actually gives a shit about recruiting also matters. The end. I can't remember who all was involved at this point, but it seems like some posters are arguing against Damone's demonstrable three-year recruiting advantage over Petersen by pointing to results on the field/in the draft with those respective players, then others are arguing that Petersen's later classes were better, even though the results on the field for those players tilt way toward Oregon.[/b]

As for @CallMeBigErn, weirdly hostile for just having an opinion that's clearly shared by many people in the biz of college football. I disagree, Wilcox is shit, but I think Ern's probably right for the wrong reason: We're all forgetting that this is all just a simulation to cause UW fans pain. 26 pages of laughing at misfortune later, and we all forget that no matter who Oregon hires, he's going to buttfuck UW anyway, whether it makes sense or not, because that's how the world seems to work lately. Besides, at least a dozen pages of piling on and calling a guy a doog in a 26 page schadenfreude thread about Oregon losing their coach seems awfully ironic. A bit little-brotherish...

Petersens later classes were ranked better than his first 3, but still not as good as Oregon’s. Bottom line is Oregon had higher ranked recruiting classes during the Petersen era regardless who there coach was at Oregon. [/b] Which is MY FUCKING POINT. Oregon has a built in recruiting advantage with Nike/PK. This speaks nothing to the fact that a good coach can overcome this with better player development and coaching.

This isn't true though. Per 247 (your site of choice earlier in this thread)

2018: UW 13th nationally, Oregon 17th
2019: Oregon 9th, UW 10th
2020: UW 12th, Oregon 17th

Three year average: Oregon 14.3, UW 11.6

Umm… check the facts. Per 247. Maybe you were looking at softball. https://247sports.com/college/washington/Season/2019-Football/Commits/

2017. UO 19 UW 22
2018. UO 13 UW 16
2019. UO 7 UW 16
2020. UO 11 UW 16

Yeah but our recruits sucked.

I never said that dipshit. Petersen recruited well. But Oregon out recruited him consistently and that’s due to Nike. Oregon had inferior coaches. How the fuck is this so hard for you dumb fucks to understand? Whoever Oregon gets, he will magically be a “great recruiter”.

I notice that you are ignoring the fact that, per player, UW was getting higher rated recruits than Oregon.

JFC A bunch of fucking doogs around here. If you look at it just right in a certain angle, UW out recruited Oregon.

Man for man, UW outrecruited UO, but that's only just right in a certain angle. Keep digging.

 

[GreenRiverGatorz]

@MikeDamone is imploding. I half expect to see a "Stalin please ban me" meltdown post later this week.

 

[AtomicDawg]

Aids

 

[creepycoug]

I would argue NIL levels the playing field

And I would argue that you're wrong. I predict that year one of NIL will have taught some marketing/branding firms a good lesson, and we'll quickly stop seeing million dollar deals for two-handoff quarterbacks. With that gone, NIL will become exactly what I predicted: The same system as before, only legal, tax deductible, and injected with serious amounts of rhino cum. NIL equaling a level playing field is the same kind of Randian fantasy as me having the same access to a Koenigsegg Jesko as Bill Gates. I mean, both of us are allowed[/i] to buy one, right?

Just using the example of our little plucky neighbor to the south, when you have an "owner" willing to part with millions to win, you can do things like build an expensive house for players to "rent out" or other such nonsense that used to all happen under the table. WSU's allowed[/i] to do the same thing now, but can they?

...Bruce Snyder did it at Cal. Jeff Tedford did it at Cal. It can be done at Cal unless you're saying the school is more hostile to winning football now than it was then...

I would argue this is exactly the case. I remember Cal's stadium packed and rockin' as Lynch drove the training cart around the field. As I kid, I remember Cal always being a legit contender. The COVID excuses seem lame, but they are true. And I'm no defender of Wilcox, being first (and right) to say he was a mediocre at best DC here when everyone else seems to blow him for his three-consecutive-blowouts-every-season performance.

As for the Great @MikeDamone @chuck War of 2021, I see it both ways: Oregon sells itself more than Warshington right now. Having somebody at Oregon who actually gives a shit about recruiting also matters. The end. I can't remember who all was involved at this point, but it seems like some posters are arguing against Damone's demonstrable three-year recruiting advantage over Petersen by pointing to results on the field/in the draft with those respective players, then others are arguing that Petersen's later classes were better, even though the results on the field for those players tilt way toward Oregon.[/b]

As for @CallMeBigErn, weirdly hostile for just having an opinion that's clearly shared by many people in the biz of college football. I disagree, Wilcox is shit, but I think Ern's probably right for the wrong reason: We're all forgetting that this is all just a simulation to cause UW fans pain. 26 pages of laughing at misfortune later, and we all forget that no matter who Oregon hires, he's going to buttfuck UW anyway, whether it makes sense or not, because that's how the world seems to work lately. Besides, at least a dozen pages of piling on and calling a guy a doog in a 26 page schadenfreude thread about Oregon losing their coach seems awfully ironic. A bit little-brotherish...

Petersens later classes were ranked better than his first 3, but still not as good as Oregon’s. Bottom line is Oregon had higher ranked recruiting classes during the Petersen era regardless who there coach was at Oregon. [/b] Which is MY FUCKING POINT. Oregon has a built in recruiting advantage with Nike/PK. This speaks nothing to the fact that a good coach can overcome this with better player development and coaching.

This isn't true though. Per 247 (your site of choice earlier in this thread)

2018: UW 13th nationally, Oregon 17th
2019: Oregon 9th, UW 10th
2020: UW 12th, Oregon 17th

Three year average: Oregon 14.3, UW 11.6

Umm… check the facts. Per 247. Maybe you were looking at softball. https://247sports.com/college/washington/Season/2019-Football/Commits/

2017. UO 19 UW 22
2018. UO 13 UW 16
2019. UO 7 UW 16
2020. UO 11 UW 16

Yeah but our recruits sucked.

I never said that dipshit. Petersen recruited well. But Oregon out recruited him consistently and that’s due to Nike. Oregon had inferior coaches. How the fuck is this so hard for you dumb fucks to understand? Whoever Oregon gets, he will magically be a “great recruiter”.

I'm not going to disagree with you on the greater Oregon point Mike. But Crisco's recruiting chops were well documented for even @GrandpaSankey to see well before he landed in YouGene. In fact, I'd say relative to what he was able to do at Rutgers, he actually underperformed at Oregon based in part on the point you're making.

In addition to Nike, which is an indisputable advantage (and one that doogs curiously describe as if it were somehow immoral), I think the Chip years helped put them out there as a name. And we all know that guy was a lazy ass recruiter.

 

[creepycoug]

I would argue NIL levels the playing field

And I would argue that you're wrong. I predict that year one of NIL will have taught some marketing/branding firms a good lesson, and we'll quickly stop seeing million dollar deals for two-handoff quarterbacks. With that gone, NIL will become exactly what I predicted: The same system as before, only legal, tax deductible, and injected with serious amounts of rhino cum. NIL equaling a level playing field is the same kind of Randian fantasy as me having the same access to a Koenigsegg Jesko as Bill Gates. I mean, both of us are allowed[/i] to buy one, right?

Just using the example of our little plucky neighbor to the south, when you have an "owner" willing to part with millions to win, you can do things like build an expensive house for players to "rent out" or other such nonsense that used to all happen under the table. WSU's allowed[/i] to do the same thing now, but can they?

...Bruce Snyder did it at Cal. Jeff Tedford did it at Cal. It can be done at Cal unless you're saying the school is more hostile to winning football now than it was then...

I would argue this is exactly the case. I remember Cal's stadium packed and rockin' as Lynch drove the training cart around the field. As I kid, I remember Cal always being a legit contender. The COVID excuses seem lame, but they are true. And I'm no defender of Wilcox, being first (and right) to say he was a mediocre at best DC here when everyone else seems to blow him for his three-consecutive-blowouts-every-season performance.

As for the Great @MikeDamone @chuck War of 2021, I see it both ways: Oregon sells itself more than Warshington right now. Having somebody at Oregon who actually gives a shit about recruiting also matters. The end. I can't remember who all was involved at this point, but it seems like some posters are arguing against Damone's demonstrable three-year recruiting advantage over Petersen by pointing to results on the field/in the draft with those respective players, then others are arguing that Petersen's later classes were better, even though the results on the field for those players tilt way toward Oregon.[/b]

As for @CallMeBigErn, weirdly hostile for just having an opinion that's clearly shared by many people in the biz of college football. I disagree, Wilcox is shit, but I think Ern's probably right for the wrong reason: We're all forgetting that this is all just a simulation to cause UW fans pain. 26 pages of laughing at misfortune later, and we all forget that no matter who Oregon hires, he's going to buttfuck UW anyway, whether it makes sense or not, because that's how the world seems to work lately. Besides, at least a dozen pages of piling on and calling a guy a doog in a 26 page schadenfreude thread about Oregon losing their coach seems awfully ironic. A bit little-brotherish...

Petersens later classes were ranked better than his first 3, but still not as good as Oregon’s. Bottom line is Oregon had higher ranked recruiting classes during the Petersen era regardless who there coach was at Oregon. [/b] Which is MY FUCKING POINT. Oregon has a built in recruiting advantage with Nike/PK. This speaks nothing to the fact that a good coach can overcome this with better player development and coaching.

This isn't true though. Per 247 (your site of choice earlier in this thread)

2018: UW 13th nationally, Oregon 17th
2019: Oregon 9th, UW 10th
2020: UW 12th, Oregon 17th

Three year average: Oregon 14.3, UW 11.6

Umm… check the facts. Per 247. Maybe you were looking at softball. https://247sports.com/college/washington/Season/2019-Football/Commits/

2017. UO 19 UW 22
2018. UO 13 UW 16
2019. UO 7 UW 16
2020. UO 11 UW 16

Yeah but our recruits sucked.

I never said that dipshit. Petersen recruited well. But Oregon out recruited him consistently and that’s due to Nike. Oregon had inferior coaches. How the fuck is this so hard for you dumb fucks to understand? Whoever Oregon gets, he will magically be a “great recruiter”.

I notice that you are ignoring the fact that, per player, UW was getting higher rated recruits than Oregon.

JFC A bunch of fucking doogs around here. If you look at it just right in a certain angle, UW out recruited Oregon.

Man for man, UW outrecruited UO, but that's only just right in a certain angle. Keep digging.

May I humbly ask, acknowledging that my opinion is no more important than anyone else's, what this matters? Oregon just lost their coach and is stumbling into a who cares? bowl while Washington just wasted millions of dollars and two plus years of time (and recruiting cycles) on perhaps the worst coaching hire in the Pac 12 over the last, IDK, call it ... 10 years?

Comparing who had a better small run in the P12 over the last 5 to 7 years is like two midgets arguing over height.