LMAO at 46xyzlgbt claiming Oregon is "big bro"
I don't think the big bro thing worked out very well.
View attachment 53824
You guys had a great season tying the failed Oregon season.
Also, Oregon got UCLA, UW, and Utah at home. It was very easy to go better than 7-2 in-conference.
Washington had the 6th (maybe 7th, can’t remember) easiest schedule in the conference and you played one more home game than Oregon.
Oregon played the #1 schedule in the Pac12.
Did any of you actually graduate from UW?
North champs again.
Are you talking overall or in-conference with this toughest schedule bullshit? I respect taking on Georgia. That kind of fucked you and they would have rolled anyone in the Pac-12. In conference you can make the argument Oregon's was tougher than UW's because the Huskies avoided Utah and Oregon didn't, but the Huskies also had UCLA and Oregon on the road.
Several Pac-12 teams clearly had tougher in-conference roads than Oregon:
Some teams had to play all of the top teams (Oregon, UCLA, USC, Utah, Washington) - UCLA, Arizona, and Stanford - Stanford had all of them other then USC on the road too and had to play the mighty Beav. No question Stanford had the toughest in-conference slate. Arizona probably second.
Your opinion doesn’t matter. There are analytical SOS rankings available.
For instance, your opinion that Washington had to play all the top teams is false. You didn’t play Utah or USC. That’s why you’re so low in the SOS rankings vs other conference schedules.
You fucked up our SOS because it turned out you were soft front running pussies. We strengthened yours because we turned out to be the #2 team in the conference.
We’re tied though. Same record. So no.
There’s no way you went to UW. Can’t do simple problem solving.
Did you study theater or something?
37-34
It was all over the internet
You lost and you get 2nd place
Your NW Champs and North Division Champs thank you for playing
I’m only responding to what’s written on here. I’m not making anything up. You all are.
“Washington played all the top teams.” Is wrong.
“Oregon had the easier schedule.” Is wrong.
“We won a division” Is wrong.
I am saying Oregon failed this year. I am not arguing that.
Our failure of a season equals your 5th? best in the last 20 years? Maybe 8th best in the last 30?
What is the problem here?
Never said Washington had a tougher schedule. Overall, Oregon's no question was because they played Georgia. In-conference, I think it's close, but I'd say Oregon's was tougher, but not by much.
Oregon's 7-2 is different, because you lost the tie-breaker and Oregon came back from a 10-4 season with a nice chunk of returning experience/talent. Washington came off 4-8 with the only two players who didn't look like ass last year leaving early for the NFL.
There's no fucking way you wouldn't trade say losing at Arizona and to UCLA for beating the Huskies and Beav, especially on the road.
I would trade a spot to possibly backdoor into the Rose Bowl. I mean why not? Guess who’d be the first group of long time, generational losers to come over here and remind Oregon fans how they got there? It has nothing to do with who we lost to. I don’t care about “who we lose to” and have made that clear over the years I’ve wasted on here.
I am a college football atheist. I only care about the end result. Not how we got there.
You all just happen to be here. So, It’s my job, for now, to remind you you’ve done nothing for 30 years except that one time vs 8-3 #14 Purdue, over 20 years ago.
So let’s talk about whom wants to trade places with whom. You can have this year, I’ll take the previous 25.
