One Thing You Have to Give Sark

[DeepSeaZ]

Of course it's not the only reason. There were a thousand reasons. His performance and our lack of ability to stop it or match it is just the most obvious reason.

in addition to being seriously dreamy: the man has learned what sticks in Seattle.

witness the "we played with them for 3 and 3/4s of the game" post game comment.

this does one really important, and obvious, thing - it buys him another pass because all the dumbshits will say, "we're really fucking close! We almost beat them with their best QB ever and we're playing with an average QB by UW standards."

that is as much anecdote as it is theory. just yesterday I was talking to two guys and they were, rightfully, marvelling at Mariotta. they were especially focused on how his mobility makes him a very hard guy to prepare for, and how "every time we had his receivers covered and were putting pressure on him, he'd just take off." the implication here, for doogs, is that (1) Mariottas come around once in a very long while, (2) [they said this], he'll be gone to the NFL soon, and (3) but for this once-in-a-lifetime player, we're really just as good as they are. of course, while he had some runs, he beat us throwing out of the fucking pocket and was comfortable all day fucking long.

I'm still struggling with their reasoning that the only reason UW lost is because of Mariotta. Oregon didn't get to 10 in a row with a guy that's only played 2 years.

 

[TierbsHsotBoobs]

in addition to being seriously dreamy: the man has learned what sticks in Seattle.

witness the "we played with them for 3 and 3/4s of the game" post game comment.

this does one really important, and obvious, thing - it buys him another pass because all the dumbshits will say, "we're really fucking close! We almost beat them with their best QB ever and we're playing with an average QB by UW standards."

that is as much anecdote as it is theory. just yesterday I was talking to two guys and they were, rightfully, marvelling at Mariotta. they were especially focused on how his mobility makes him a very hard guy to prepare for, and how "every time we had his receivers covered and were putting pressure on him, he'd just take off." the implication here, for doogs, is that (1) Mariottas come around once in a very long while, (2) [they said this], he'll be gone to the NFL soon, and (3) but for this once-in-a-lifetime player, we're really just as good as they are. of course, while he had some runs, he beat us throwing out of the fucking pocket and was comfortable all day fucking long.

I'm still struggling with their reasoning that the only reason UW lost is because of Mariotta. Oregon didn't get to 10 in a row with a guy that's only played 2 years.

Doogs don't use reason.

That's why you are struggling with it. It's a them problem, not a you problem.

 

[[Deleted User]]

We'll beat Oregon now they just lost Stewert and Dixon- Doogs in 2008
We'll beat Oregon now they lost Blount and have a new coach- Doogs in 2009
We'll beat Oregon now they lost Masoli- Doogs in 2010
We'll beat Oregon now they'll be on sanctions- Doogs in 2011
We'll beat Oregon now they lost Darron Thomas and LMJ- Doogs in 2012
We'll beat Oregon now they don't have Black Mamba and cokehead TE- Doogs in 2013
We'll beat Oregon now they don't have Marriota- Doogs in 2014

This cycle never ends. Oregon every year dominates the LOS yet Doogs always act like if it weren't for that one skill guy we'd beat them.

Lather, Rinse, Repeat.