Register    Login    Forum    Search    FAQ    Contact Us  Your donations are greatly appreciated! Donate  Chat Room

Board index » SEAHAWKS.NET - THE VOICE OF THE 12TH MAN » [ THE NCAA FOOTBALL & PRO DRAFT FORUM ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 464 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 10  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Oregon vs. Washington
 Post Posted: Sat Sep 21, 2013 8:03 pm 
NET Veteran
Offline

Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 1:36 pm
Posts: 1609
You've really said nothing to refute my argument. You're too caught up on the name of the Bowls and not the actual opponents.

How they got there? Ok..... but you basically laughed at Pac 12 championships, saying it was the game after that matters. If that's the case, again, Oregon clearly played against a more quality opponent. They didn't win the PAC 12? That's fine. Alabama didn't even win their division when they beat LSU for the title, let alone their conference. It's the game after that matters!

You still refuse to stick to a single side of it, wanting to have both side for your argument. It's not going to work. Just admit the Fiesta Bowl win was more impressive, because you certainly haven't made the case for the last years Rose Bowl.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Oregon vs. Washington
 Post Posted: Sat Sep 21, 2013 8:04 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2012 6:20 pm
Posts: 4682
Location: The 5-0
The Dawgs were the best team in the country in 84. Period.

We got caught overlooking an unranked USC team and it apparently pissed the writers off. Then in the post season, While a well rested BYU (who did they play all year?) beat a terrible, 5 loss Michigan team, we beat #2 Oklahoma as the #4 team in the country. Considering the schools schedules, we should have been *awarded the Natty. Why? Simply because we were the best team in the country.

* JSea....this idea of winning the title on the field works both ways. We were not given the same opportunity to "win it on the field" as teams do today. I sincerely doubt many believe BYU would have beaten us for the title in 1984. No way.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Oregon vs. Washington
 Post Posted: Sat Sep 21, 2013 8:13 pm 
* NET Moderator *
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 2:35 pm
Posts: 18457
Location: Milwaukie, Oregon
HawkWow wrote:
The Dawgs were the best team in the country in 84. Period.

We got caught overlooking an unranked USC team and it apparently pissed the writers off. Then in the post season, While a well rested BYU (who did they play all year?) beat a terrible, 5 loss Michigan team, we beat #2 Oklahoma as the #4 team in the country. Considering the schools schedules, we should have been *awarded the Natty. Why? Simply because we were the best team in the country.

* JSea....this idea of winning the title on the field works both ways. We were not given the same opportunity to "win it on the field" as teams do today. I sincerely doubt many believe BYU would have beaten us for the title in 1984. No way.


That's fine. My point is I don't get why we're talking about history because it's irrelevant to the present.

Not to sound like a jerk, but I don't care if UW was the best team in 1984. And I would say the exact same thing if Oregon was the best team in 1984.

I thought you guys were excited about 2013, then y'all go all retro on me!

_________________
Image


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Oregon vs. Washington
 Post Posted: Sat Sep 21, 2013 8:16 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 26, 2012 1:24 am
Posts: 597
cesame wrote:
You've really said nothing to refute my argument. You're too caught up on the name of the Bowls and not the actual opponents.

How they got there? Ok..... but you basically laughed at Pac 12 championships, saying it was the game after that matters. If that's the case, again, Oregon clearly played against a more quality opponent. They didn't win the PAC 12? That's fine. Alabama didn't even win their division when they beat LSU for the title, let alone their conference. It's the game after that matters!

You still refuse to stick to a single side of it, wanting to have both side for your argument. It's not going to work. Just admit the Fiesta Bowl win was more impressive, because you certainly haven't made the case for the last years Rose Bowl.



Read what I wrote. Go do some research into how the bowl system is constructed. I am not going to respond further on those topics until you do so. Clearly you have some work to do in that area.

Here is why I chuckled at the 3 time Pac 12 Champions comment you made. You guys won in 2010, even though there wasn't an actual conference championship game at that point... but you had the best record at the end of scheduled conference play and rightfully so were Pac 12 champions. You then LOST the national championship. Thus... its the game after that matters. Now that we have a real conference title game, its a more crisp point to make. (i.e. play in the Pac12 CG, Win, Play Rose/NCG).

Note you also lost the Rose Bowl in 2009 (to Ohio State, no less) but in that year the Fiesta Bowl was played between the #4 TCU Horned Frogs and Boise State. Would you have preferred to play the Fiesta bowl that year? I am sure they would have LOVED to have you guys... Luckily your school is wiser about Bowl success than you seem to be.

I am not having "both sides" of an argument. I am refusing to think of a Fiesta Bowl win (no matter who you play) as a better end to a season than a Rose Bowl. That is absurd.


Last edited by CallMeADawg on Sat Sep 21, 2013 8:22 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Oregon vs. Washington
 Post Posted: Sat Sep 21, 2013 8:21 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 26, 2012 1:24 am
Posts: 597
JSeahawks wrote:
HawkWow wrote:
The Dawgs were the best team in the country in 84. Period.

We got caught overlooking an unranked USC team and it apparently pissed the writers off. Then in the post season, While a well rested BYU (who did they play all year?) beat a terrible, 5 loss Michigan team, we beat #2 Oklahoma as the #4 team in the country. Considering the schools schedules, we should have been *awarded the Natty. Why? Simply because we were the best team in the country.

* JSea....this idea of winning the title on the field works both ways. We were not given the same opportunity to "win it on the field" as teams do today. I sincerely doubt many believe BYU would have beaten us for the title in 1984. No way.


That's fine. My point is I don't get why we're talking about history because it's irrelevant to the present.

Not to sound like a jerk, but I don't care if UW was the best team in 1984. And I would say the exact same thing if Oregon was the best team in 1984.

I thought you guys were excited about 2013, then y'all go all retro on me!


Haha... yeah, hard not to when you have a lot of pride in that tradition, history, etc. The point I was trying to make was... here is what UW did when the tides were on our side. Now that the tides are on YOUR side (Oregon) what have you done with it? One Rose Bowl win, and yes some other random BCS Bowl wins too... but where it matters most... One Rose Bowl win.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Oregon vs. Washington
 Post Posted: Sat Sep 21, 2013 8:26 pm 
* NET Baller *
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 8:02 am
Posts: 17537
Location: Graham, WA
These threads suck, and make me pissed. My fellow dawg fans usually come off sounding like those weak asses 49ers fans talking about the past like it has any relevancy to what's going on now.

The only facts that matter now is that the ducks have beat our asses badly over how many years? It doesn't matter how good we are this year, we can't bark til we beat em. Plus, why are we worried about them? They aren't the next team to be played.

_________________
Image
3elieve


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Oregon vs. Washington
 Post Posted: Sat Sep 21, 2013 8:30 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2012 6:20 pm
Posts: 4682
Location: The 5-0
JSeahawks wrote:
HawkWow wrote:
The Dawgs were the best team in the country in 84. Period.

We got caught overlooking an unranked USC team and it apparently pissed the writers off. Then in the post season, While a well rested BYU (who did they play all year?) beat a terrible, 5 loss Michigan team, we beat #2 Oklahoma as the #4 team in the country. Considering the schools schedules, we should have been *awarded the Natty. Why? Simply because we were the best team in the country.

* JSea....this idea of winning the title on the field works both ways. We were not given the same opportunity to "win it on the field" as teams do today. I sincerely doubt many believe BYU would have beaten us for the title in 1984. No way.


That's fine. My point is I don't get why we're talking about history because it's irrelevant to the present.

Not to sound like a jerk, but I don't care if UW was the best team in 1984. And I would say the exact same thing if Oregon was the best team in 1984.

I thought you guys were excited about 2013, then y'all go all retro on me!


"Retro"...Hahaha. Excellent. ; )

No, I'm not as excited about this team as some of our teams of the past...that's for sure. Especially when the best team in the country holds a vendetta against us. Why? What did we ever do to the Ducks to deserve the humiliation they crave to bestow upon us...why why why?

Hard to argue your point on living in the past. You bringing the 9er trolls into the equation was a death blow. You win (but that 84 thing upsets me a lot, had to comment).


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Oregon vs. Washington
 Post Posted: Sat Sep 21, 2013 8:35 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 26, 2012 1:24 am
Posts: 597
Throwdown wrote:
These threads suck, and make me pissed. My fellow dawg fans usually come off sounding like those weak asses 49ers fans talking about the past like it has any relevancy to what's going on now.

The only facts that matter now is that the ducks have beat our asses badly over how many years? It doesn't matter how good we are this year, we can't bark til we beat em. Plus, why are we worried about them? They aren't the next team to be played.


I do not see it like that. I have attempted to clarify the differences but apparently no matter how much English I put on it - the point is not getting across. This is not a here and now, what have you done situation.

They have dominated the Pac12 in one way or another for the last 9+ years. Especially UW. What I am trying to get an answer from a Duck fan on is this:

In those 9+ years, what has Oregon done (other than win the Pac12 on and off...) other than win one rose bowl? The yardstick of past Pac12 play says they should have done more than that time - especially if Oregon is as "elite" as the Duck fans have said they are. The UW history was used as an example of what other Pac12/10 Titans did with that time. Would you feel better if I pulled up USC? They are the be-all-end-all pinnacle of the conference, all time.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Oregon vs. Washington
 Post Posted: Sat Sep 21, 2013 8:36 pm 
* NET Moderator *
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 2:35 pm
Posts: 18457
Location: Milwaukie, Oregon
HawkWow wrote:
Why? What did we ever do to the Ducks to deserve the humiliation they crave to bestow upon us...why why why?


Kim Grimolds. Chris Fetters. And Ruth Robbins (I actually kinda like Ruth, but she's wacky when it comes to her Duck hatred).

They are the reason that most Duck fans (at least us message board nerd Duck fans) want to destroy UW. I love UW's new system. I like a lot of your players. I have fun yuckin it up with most of the UW fans on this board, most of y'all are good people. But I don't ever want either of those three that I mentioned to have the satisfaction of UW beating UO.

_________________
Image


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Oregon vs. Washington
 Post Posted: Sat Sep 21, 2013 8:43 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 26, 2012 1:24 am
Posts: 597
JSeahawks wrote:
HawkWow wrote:
Why? What did we ever do to the Ducks to deserve the humiliation they crave to bestow upon us...why why why?


Kim Grimolds. Chris Fetters. And Ruth Robbins (I actually kinda like Ruth, but she's wacky when it comes to her Duck hatred).

They are the reason that most Duck fans (at least us message board nerd Duck fans) want to destroy UW. I love UW's new system. I like a lot of your players. I have fun yuckin it up with most of the UW fans on this board, most of y'all are good people. But I don't ever want either of those three that I mentioned to have the satisfaction of UW beating UO.


You cannot be on top of the pack forever. The Ducks have to make the most of their reign. They will fall eventually, and UW will beat you guys. Its just how it works. Oh, and isnt is Rick dancing on the 50 yard line in your house that fueled the hatred of 9 solar revolutions? :)


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Oregon vs. Washington
 Post Posted: Sat Sep 21, 2013 8:45 pm 
* NET Moderator *
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 2:35 pm
Posts: 18457
Location: Milwaukie, Oregon
Maybe for some. I actually like Neuheisel. He's a funny dude and great on the Pac 12 network.

_________________
Image


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Oregon vs. Washington
 Post Posted: Sat Sep 21, 2013 8:45 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2012 6:20 pm
Posts: 4682
Location: The 5-0
JSeahawks wrote:
HawkWow wrote:
Why? What did we ever do to the Ducks to deserve the humiliation they crave to bestow upon us...why why why?


Kim Grimolds. Chris Fetters. And Ruth Robbins (I actually kinda like Ruth, but she's wacky when it comes to her Duck hatred).

They are the reason that most Duck fans (at least us message board nerd Duck fans) want to destroy UW. I love UW's new system. I like a lot of your players. I have fun yuckin it up with most of the UW fans on this board, most of y'all are good people. But I don't ever want either of those three that I mentioned to have the satisfaction of UW beating UO.


I do not know of these people. I think you already know my position on the subject. I'm not afraid of losing my Dawg cred by saying I think Oregon is the best team in the country. I have to go back in time, one more time, in saying that until the series is tied, or Oregon has more titles than us, I won't be the least bit upset if they win a Natty. I love football and Oregon is very entertaining. The ass-whuppins they've laid on us, we had coming. I am content in knowing our day will come again. Hopefully sooner than later. t's been rough.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Oregon vs. Washington
 Post Posted: Sat Sep 21, 2013 8:49 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 26, 2012 1:24 am
Posts: 597
Ohio State, IMO, is the best team in the NCAA.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Oregon vs. Washington
 Post Posted: Sat Sep 21, 2013 8:51 pm 
* NET Moderator *
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 2:35 pm
Posts: 18457
Location: Milwaukie, Oregon
1. Alabama
2. Oregon
3. LSU
4. Ohio State
5. Stanford/Clemson

In my opinion. But I think Ohio State and Louisville are the most likely to go undefeated, because of their cake walk schedules.

_________________
Image


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Oregon vs. Washington
 Post Posted: Sat Sep 21, 2013 8:56 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 26, 2012 1:24 am
Posts: 597
Here is mine:

1. Ohio State
2. Alabama
3. Oregon
4. LSU
5. Clemson
6. Stanford
7. Washington
8. Miami
9. Florida State
10. Oklahoma State


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Oregon vs. Washington
 Post Posted: Sat Sep 21, 2013 8:57 pm 
NET Veteran
Offline

Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 1:36 pm
Posts: 1609
CallMeADawg wrote:
cesame wrote:
You've really said nothing to refute my argument. You're too caught up on the name of the Bowls and not the actual opponents.

How they got there? Ok..... but you basically laughed at Pac 12 championships, saying it was the game after that matters. If that's the case, again, Oregon clearly played against a more quality opponent. They didn't win the PAC 12? That's fine. Alabama didn't even win their division when they beat LSU for the title, let alone their conference. It's the game after that matters!

You still refuse to stick to a single side of it, wanting to have both side for your argument. It's not going to work. Just admit the Fiesta Bowl win was more impressive, because you certainly haven't made the case for the last years Rose Bowl.



Read what I wrote. Go do some research into how the bowl system is constructed. I am not going to respond further on those topics until you do so. Clearly you have some work to do in that area.

Here is why I chuckled at the 3 time Pac 12 Champions comment you made. You guys won in 2010, even though there wasn't an actual conference championship game at that point... but you had the best record at the end of scheduled conference play and rightfully so were Pac 12 champions. You then LOST the national championship. Thus... its the game after that matters. Now that we have a real conference title game, its a more crisp point to make. (i.e. play in the Pac12 CG, Win, Play Rose/NCG).

Note you also lost the Rose Bowl in 2009 (to Ohio State, no less) but in that year the Fiesta Bowl was played between the #4 TCU Horned Frogs and Boise State. Would you have preferred to play the Fiesta bowl that year? I am sure they would have LOVED to have you guys... Luckily your school is wiser about Bowl success than you seem to be.

I am not having "both sides" of an argument. I am refusing to think of a Fiesta Bowl win (no matter who you play) as a better end to a season than a Rose Bowl. That is absurd.


:34853_doh:


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Oregon vs. Washington
 Post Posted: Sat Sep 21, 2013 9:00 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 26, 2012 1:24 am
Posts: 597
Insightful response. Thanks.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Oregon vs. Washington
 Post Posted: Sat Sep 21, 2013 9:00 pm 
* NET Staff Alumni *
* NET Staff Alumni *
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 5:38 pm
Posts: 5428
Location: Hagerstown, MD
CallMeADawg wrote:
Ohio State, IMO, is the best team in the NCAA.

That statement right there invalidates any credibility you might have had concerning college football.

_________________
Image
You are absolutely entitled to state your opinion whenever you wish, and I am absolutely entitled to point out the stupidity of that opinion with the same frequency.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Oregon vs. Washington
 Post Posted: Sat Sep 21, 2013 9:02 pm 
NET Veteran
Offline

Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 1:36 pm
Posts: 1609
CallMeADawg wrote:
Insightful response. Thanks.


Tell me why I should continue responding to your double-sided argument?

Pick a side and stick with it, then MAYBE I'll continue this discussion.

That said I'd rather let it die. I've proven my points enough.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Oregon vs. Washington
 Post Posted: Sat Sep 21, 2013 9:03 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 26, 2012 1:24 am
Posts: 597
SeatownJay wrote:
CallMeADawg wrote:
Ohio State, IMO, is the best team in the NCAA.

That statement right there invalidates any credibility you might have had concerning college football.


Not really. I really don't think Alabama is as good as the polls like to place them, also I believe they can easily knock off Oregon in a head-to-head match-up. My statement only validates two things:

1. I have an opinion.
2. I do not think Alabama and Oregon are as good as other people think they are.

Point #1 being the most important. :)


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Oregon vs. Washington
 Post Posted: Sat Sep 21, 2013 9:06 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 26, 2012 1:24 am
Posts: 597
cesame wrote:
CallMeADawg wrote:
Insightful response. Thanks.


Tell me why I should continue responding to your double-sided argument?

Pick a side and stick with it, then MAYBE I'll continue this discussion.

That said I'd rather let it die. I've proven my points enough.


You proved that you do not "discuss" things, you do not read, digest and respond to things others say to you, and you have a pre-fabricated perspective you choose not to budge on. That's fine - just don't go around blaming it on some false double sided argument or other ways of attempting to invalidate the things presented to you by others.

Just say, hey this is my opinion and I am sticking to that. I can respect that. You have proven nothing though. I presented facts and data, you presented thoughts and opinions.

That is all.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Oregon vs. Washington
 Post Posted: Sat Sep 21, 2013 9:08 pm 
NET Veteran
Offline

Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 1:36 pm
Posts: 1609
Lol. If that's what makes you feel better.

Now this is done.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Oregon vs. Washington
 Post Posted: Sat Sep 21, 2013 9:12 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 26, 2012 1:24 am
Posts: 597
LOL


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Oregon vs. Washington
 Post Posted: Sat Sep 21, 2013 9:38 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 4:36 pm
Posts: 9878
cesame wrote:
I still need to see Washington play a quality opponent.

This, and I'm a UW fan!

_________________
42-13, 29-3, and 23-17 and a Lombardi trophy from THIS century, deal with it niner trolls

SEATTLE SEAHAWKS SUPERBOWL XLVIII CHAMPIONS!


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Oregon vs. Washington
 Post Posted: Sat Sep 21, 2013 10:00 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 26, 2012 1:24 am
Posts: 597
Sports Hernia wrote:
cesame wrote:
I still need to see Washington play a quality opponent.

This, and I'm a UW fan!


Agree.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Oregon vs. Washington
 Post Posted: Sat Sep 21, 2013 10:23 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2012 6:20 pm
Posts: 4682
Location: The 5-0
We've played a couple mid-level finesse teams. Teams designed to outscore their opponent and have that "whoever has the ball last" flavor to them. We won't know what we have until Stanford. Anxious to see if the O line and KP stands up to the increase in pressure.

I am certain we have a top 20 team this year, not certain where in that 20 we rightfully belong. Go Dawgs.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Oregon vs. Washington
 Post Posted: Sat Sep 21, 2013 11:50 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 26, 2012 1:24 am
Posts: 597
Progress is good though. I think our QB of the future, is going to turn some heads.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Oregon vs. Washington
 Post Posted: Sun Sep 22, 2013 6:49 am 
NET Veteran
Online

Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 7:49 pm
Posts: 2112
Funny that UW fans can't talk about the upcoming game. All they can do is bring up fake titles that some obscure organization handed out that no one cared about then, and no one cares about now.

But hey maybe someday when UO has 5 10 win seasons in a row and wins by an avg of 28 points a game, UW fans will give us credit. Because at the end if the day, that's all we really care about. :sarcasm_off:


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Oregon vs. Washington
 Post Posted: Sun Sep 22, 2013 7:19 am 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 26, 2012 1:24 am
Posts: 597
CPHawk wrote:
Funny that UW fans can't talk about the upcoming game. All they can do is bring up fake titles that some obscure organization handed out that no one cared about then, and no one cares about now.

But hey maybe someday when UO has 5 10 win seasons in a row and wins by an avg of 28 points a game, UW fans will give us credit. Because at the end if the day, that's all we really care about. :sarcasm_off:


This thread isn't about UW vs Arizona. That "obscure organization" is the NCAA. You Duck fans are aware that you play in the NCAA right?

:sarcasm_on: But hey, maybe someday UO will wake up and realize that Rose Bowls are better than Fiesta Bowls. I would give you guys credit if you could do that. :sarcasm_off:


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Oregon vs. Washington
 Post Posted: Sun Sep 22, 2013 10:56 am 
NET Veteran
Online

Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 7:49 pm
Posts: 2112
the NCAA has never named UW champs in any men's sport. Rose bowls are average now, but keep that as your goal.

For the record, unlike you, I'm not trying to put UW down. They accomplished a lot under James, and shared a title(not NCAA) with Miami. UO would have done the same thing in 2010, but we have fixed that issue. UO played and lost in the title game. I'm ok with that, that's a great great season.


For the record some organization named QPRS gave their title to UW in 84, and in 90 some other no name rothman gave UW their title. Neither of which matters, it ranks right up there with being named champs by the Tacoma news tribune.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Oregon vs. Washington
 Post Posted: Sun Sep 22, 2013 4:46 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 3:41 pm
Posts: 1588
I get the feeling that "CallMeADawg" is Dawgso under a different name, changed the background, writes differently, but argument is exactly the same.

Here's what I don't get, UW fans seem to constantly demean Oregon's success, or attempt to not even acknowledge that it is actually success. Not just UW fans either, I was in Pullman this weekend for the WSU game talking to a fellow alumni about how much he hates Oregon, and that they are cheating in a way with Phil Knight. Silly argument, but its not solitary UW's.

Let's say UW beats Oregon next month, Husky Stadium will go absolutely crazy, and I'm willing to bet people will storm the field and the UW campus will party as well as they can. Softy will take the air in the postgame show choking back tears at the greatness of the moment, yada yada yada. It will be a lot of celebrating for a win against a non elite program.

I've never understood the need and desire to demean an opponent, when you beat them, it demeans the achievement of victory. It's ridiculous.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Oregon vs. Washington
 Post Posted: Sun Sep 22, 2013 5:52 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 26, 2012 1:24 am
Posts: 597
First, this is my only name on this board. I don't really post all that often, but I enjoy debate over college football. :) Oregon has been very successful over the last decade. I would never take that away from them. Their fans on the other hand, can pound sand.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Oregon vs. Washington
 Post Posted: Sun Sep 22, 2013 6:25 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 26, 2012 1:24 am
Posts: 597
CPHawk wrote:
the NCAA has never named UW champs in any men's sport. Rose bowls are average now, but keep that as your goal.


Really now? The NCAA has never named UW champs in any men's sport? That's a bold statement to make dude, and its horribly inaccurate. The NCAA credits Washington with 4 national championships for men's football. The Pac-12 does not recognize any poll-based championships. Perhaps that is what you meant to say? Or perhaps you were discrediting WA for its men's Rowing championships? (Of which it has won 16 times, and currently 3 years in a row... heh) but the NCAA doesn't govern those.

Rose Bowls are average? WTF?


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Oregon vs. Washington
 Post Posted: Sun Sep 22, 2013 6:53 pm 
NET Veteran
Online

Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 7:49 pm
Posts: 2112
The NCAA football champs last year wasn't Alabama it was ND State.

And yeah welcome to 2013, the goal is to go to Miami this year, not the rose bowl. Next year it will be to go to the playoffs.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Oregon vs. Washington
 Post Posted: Sun Sep 22, 2013 7:12 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 26, 2012 1:24 am
Posts: 597
The Division I-AA champs were ND State. True story and GO BISON (and GO E. WA Eagles for that matter) Try looking at a NCAA Record Book sometime, the NCAA recognizes 4 Division I-A UW national championship titles. Now the funny and arguable part of it all is, they recognize more than one team in all of them, even the 1960 National Championship, which is noted for both the Minnesota Gophers and the Huskies, even though the Huskies beat the Gophers that year in the Rose Bowl. :)

Kind of glad they are moving to a real playoff system. the BCS and the Poll system is a joke. As of right now (this season) you play in the Pac-12 for the Rose Bowl, and if you play well enough, you look to the BCS National Championship game instead. As stated before, anything less is a consolation prize. The King of the Pac-12 will play in one of those two games. The rest play elsewhere.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Oregon vs. Washington
 Post Posted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 12:27 am 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Online

Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 12:56 pm
Posts: 6190
This will be my first game at Husky Stadium since I wasn't able to attend this weekend (I figured I'd watch one W for sure ha). But I have watched all of UWs games.

This time we can keep up with Oregon. I still think the quacks have better personnel overall, but the divide is considerably smaller than just last year.

This is a winnable game at home.

_________________
SUPER BOWL 48 CHAMPIONS!!!!!!!!

RIP ROAD WOES 12/2/2012


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Oregon vs. Washington
 Post Posted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 6:58 am 
* NET Philistine *
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:02 am
Posts: 14122
Location: Portland, OR
seahawk2k wrote:
I get the feeling that "CallMeADawg" is Dawgso under a different name, changed the background, writes differently, but argument is exactly the same.


I'm inclined to agree.

Either way, this guy is a grade A troll that should have gotten the axe already. The UW/Oregon game isn't for 3 weeks.

_________________
Super Bowl Champions XVLIII


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Oregon vs. Washington
 Post Posted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 7:14 am 
* NET Moderator *
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 2:35 pm
Posts: 18457
Location: Milwaukie, Oregon
SonicHawk wrote:
This will be my first game at Husky Stadium since I wasn't able to attend this weekend (I figured I'd watch one W for sure ha). But I have watched all of UWs games.

This time we can keep up with Oregon. I still think the quacks have better personnel overall, but the divide is considerably smaller than just last year.

This is a winnable game at home.


Look at the offensive and defensive lines for the ducks. That's where they still have a huge advantage and where the game will be won. Uw has the skill players to compete, but not the guys in the trenches yet, IMO.

_________________
Image


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Oregon vs. Washington
 Post Posted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 7:17 am 
NET Starter
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Thu Mar 18, 2010 2:57 pm
Posts: 361
Location: Spokompton
***Little Rant***

You'd think that the perfect forum to discuss this would be DawgMan. You know, where Quack and Mutt fans could engage each other in a heated thread that would be interesting for all Pac-12 fans to peruse.

That said, Kimmie Grinolds is a complete c___. I mean, he took his purple Nerf and ran home when he decided to make DawgMan a subscription-only forum; talk about a thin-skinned baby. Apparently, he couldn't handle being called out repeatedly due to his "sources" wrongly telling him Oregon was going to get hammered with NCAA sanctions. Now the little twat is posting garbage about Leach leaving Pullman for USC or Texas. If continually pulling stuff out of your ass and then attributing it to "anonymous sources" is sports jouranlism, Kimmie deserves a Murrow Award.

Of course, he does sell real estate for a living...which puts him just slightly above Saul Goodman (or Colin Kaepernick) on the DB food chain.

***Little Rant Over***

_________________
Image


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Oregon vs. Washington
 Post Posted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 11:04 am 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 26, 2012 1:24 am
Posts: 597
Sarlacc83 wrote:
seahawk2k wrote:
I get the feeling that "CallMeADawg" is Dawgso under a different name, changed the background, writes differently, but argument is exactly the same.


I'm inclined to agree.

Either way, this guy is a grade A troll that should have gotten the axe already. The UW/Oregon game isn't for 3 weeks.


A troll because I have an opinion on the matter? This thread spawned from another discussion and the Mod asked to have Oregon v Washington debates put into its own thread - thus why this is here.

I fail to see how any of this constitutes trolling.

Also, I am not that other poster.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Oregon vs. Washington
 Post Posted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 11:42 am 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2012 6:20 pm
Posts: 4682
Location: The 5-0
Personally, I've found this thread to be entertaining. A bit surprised by the Oregon fan base complaining that we Dawg fans are not giving UO their due respect. I mean, it's Ducks vs. Dawgs, what would you expect? I hope the day never comes when the fanbase of the two teams sit around trying to out-do one another with flattery and compliments. That would just be creepy...and in some respects, disrespectful. When we no longer have this bitter rivalry, that will likely signal that one, if not both, of the teams are no longer a threat to each other. Sorta' the way I (now) feel about USC. They suck too badly to hate.

The above aside, I am probably as hardcore of a Dawg fan as anyone should care to be. I'm sick. But not so sick to where I can't identify the greatness of any given team. I've made it clear that THIS Dawg fan in particular, thinks UO is not only the best team in the country, but the most entertaining....by a long shot. Do I like the Ducks? HELL NO! I hate 'em. But they are the team to beat, IMO, and if that doesn't warrant respect, you are disrespecting the team for reasons aside from football, IMO.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Oregon vs. Washington
 Post Posted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 11:47 am 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 3:41 pm
Posts: 1588
The issue is, just like with Dawgso, the thread isn't about the game, its about the posturing between the two programs and the constant attempt at illegitimizing the other program. Did I just make up the word illegitimizing? My spell check thinks so.

The UW argument "You have no history"
The Oregon argument "All you have is ancient history"

Round and round we go. This should be a fascinating game, shame that the game itself always gets passed over and we get thread after thread of this bs. Isn't the Smack Shack for this kind of crap?


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Oregon vs. Washington
 Post Posted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 12:06 pm 
NET Starter
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Thu Mar 18, 2010 2:57 pm
Posts: 361
Location: Spokompton
seahawk2k wrote:
The UW argument "You have no history"
The Oregon argument "All you have is ancient history"


It's sort of funny...

The 40-Whiner argument "You have no history"
The Seahawk argument "All you have is ancient history"

_________________
Image


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Oregon vs. Washington
 Post Posted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 12:09 pm 
* NET Moderator *
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 2:35 pm
Posts: 18457
Location: Milwaukie, Oregon
DohBoy wrote:
seahawk2k wrote:
The UW argument "You have no history"
The Oregon argument "All you have is ancient history"


It's sort of funny...

The 40-Whiner argument "You have no history"
The Seahawk argument "All you have is ancient history"


And both the ducks and the seahawks have a really legit chance to make history this year. I just hope at least one of them can do it. I'd prefer the seahawks, but would gladly take the ducks as well. Both of them winning it all would be unbelievable for me

_________________
Image


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Oregon vs. Washington
 Post Posted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 12:12 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 26, 2012 1:24 am
Posts: 597
Best of luck to them, and I am looking forward to seeing them play in Seattle. (Both!)


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Oregon vs. Washington
 Post Posted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:42 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Wed Apr 18, 2012 8:42 pm
Posts: 634
JSeahawks wrote:
DohBoy wrote:
seahawk2k wrote:
The UW argument "You have no history"
The Oregon argument "All you have is ancient history"


It's sort of funny...

The 40-Whiner argument "You have no history"
The Seahawk argument "All you have is ancient history"


And both the ducks and the seahawks have a really legit chance to make history this year. I just hope at least one of them can do it. I'd prefer the seahawks, but would gladly take the ducks as well. Both of them winning it all would be unbelievable for me


Hm. As a huge Husky and Seahawk fan, this is where I disagree. I would take a UW National Championship over a Seahawk Super Bowl every time. I'm not exactly sure why, but it would mean a good deal more to me....and I would go CRAZY over a Super Bowl.

_________________
Follow me on Twitter: @realchrisbrown5
2013 Adopt-a-Rookie: Christine Michael


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Oregon vs. Washington
 Post Posted: Tue Sep 24, 2013 1:08 pm 
* NET Baller *
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 8:02 am
Posts: 17537
Location: Graham, WA
Yikes...

I'm taking the Super Bowl, after the darkness that was 2008 for Seattle sports, a Super Bowl would be the best thing to make us forget it.

_________________
Image
3elieve


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Oregon vs. Washington
 Post Posted: Tue Sep 24, 2013 2:40 pm 
* NET Moderator *
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 2:35 pm
Posts: 18457
Location: Milwaukie, Oregon
ChrisB Bacon wrote:
JSeahawks wrote:

And both the ducks and the seahawks have a really legit chance to make history this year. I just hope at least one of them can do it. I'd prefer the seahawks, but would gladly take the ducks as well. Both of them winning it all would be unbelievable for me


Hm. As a huge Husky and Seahawk fan, this is where I disagree. I would take a UW National Championship over a Seahawk Super Bowl every time. I'm not exactly sure why, but it would mean a good deal more to me....and I would go CRAZY over a Super Bowl.


I'm not a UO grad though. That might make me feel different. I'm just a fan.

Seahawks are my passion and my obsession. Ducks are just like a really fun hobby

Fun stat that I just came across: Marcus Mariota in his last 10 games has 32 touchdowns (24 passing, 8 rushing) and only 1 interception.

_________________
Image


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Oregon vs. Washington
 Post Posted: Tue Sep 24, 2013 2:41 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 3:41 pm
Posts: 1588
A Seahawks win in a Super Bowl is the absolute apex of things I want to happen in sports. WSU could win 10 National Titles in a row, the Super Bowl would still be sweeter.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Oregon vs. Washington
 Post Posted: Tue Sep 24, 2013 7:48 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Wed Apr 18, 2012 8:42 pm
Posts: 634
JSeahawks wrote:
ChrisB Bacon wrote:
JSeahawks wrote:

And both the ducks and the seahawks have a really legit chance to make history this year. I just hope at least one of them can do it. I'd prefer the seahawks, but would gladly take the ducks as well. Both of them winning it all would be unbelievable for me


Hm. As a huge Husky and Seahawk fan, this is where I disagree. I would take a UW National Championship over a Seahawk Super Bowl every time. I'm not exactly sure why, but it would mean a good deal more to me....and I would go CRAZY over a Super Bowl.


I'm not a UO grad though. That might make me feel different. I'm just a fan.

Seahawks are my passion and my obsession. Ducks are just like a really fun hobby

Fun stat that I just came across: Marcus Mariota in his last 10 games has 32 touchdowns (24 passing, 8 rushing) and only 1 interception.


I don't go to UW either. I play baseball at a CC in the Seattle area.

I have been going to games since I was born, though. And they're my real passion. Hawks are too, but Dawgs are #1.

_________________
Follow me on Twitter: @realchrisbrown5
2013 Adopt-a-Rookie: Christine Michael


Top 
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 464 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 10  Next

Board index » SEAHAWKS.NET - THE VOICE OF THE 12TH MAN » [ THE NCAA FOOTBALL & PRO DRAFT FORUM ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Chawker, EverydayImRusselin, General Manager and 29 guests

 

 
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Seahawks.NET is an independent fan site and not associated with the Seattle Seahawks or the NFL (National Football League).
All content within this Seahawks fan page is provided by, and for, Seattle Seahawks fans. Copyright © Seahawks.NET.