If I wasn't so lazy it would fun to look up what we lost in 1999. We were 7-5. Went 11-1 Rick's 2nd year.
Not saying we'll go 11-1. Just that a 2nd year leap is not unheard of.
I expect a better product all around next year. Who ever is here. Recruits and development trump age these days. Oregon was quite young this year
Off the top of my head, Lester Towns at LB, Jermaine Smith at CB, Gerald Harris at WR, Chris Juergens retired. I guess Mo Shaw was a contributor at RB, but that wasn't really a big loss.
The 2000 team was experienced and had a lot of good players returning. It also had the best QB in the conference. WR was the only true weakness. That team had a lot of good seniors.
I disagree about age not being important. If you have a team with Alabama talent you can get away with being young. It's different at UW. Young skill players are fine. Young and inexperienced lines are problematic. Not to mention, the talent Sark brought in at OL has been worse than other positions.
You use Oregon as an example, but Oregon has a lot of older guys who have played a lot on teams that have won. Mariota, Grassu, Fisher, Stevens, Ekpre-Omlumu, Mathis, Hill. They had four returners back on the OL, but we all saw how shitty they were with Fisher out. UW will have a patchwork OL to begin with. One or two injuries and they are likely completely fucked.
The seniors next year at UW are pretty bad. Charles is supposedly a draft worthy guard (I've never been that impressed) and Feeney will maybe be drafted as a LB and special teams ace. The rest of them (Mickens, Perkins, Littleton, Tufunga) have slim chances at best.