Oregon vs. Washington

cesame

New member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
2,013
Reaction score
0
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.
 

HawkWow

New member
Joined
Sep 3, 2012
Messages
6,740
Reaction score
0
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.
 

JSeahawks

New member
Joined
Mar 1, 2007
Messages
24,093
Reaction score
1
Location
Milwaukie, Oregon
HawkWow":295stoyj said:
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!
 
OP
OP
CallMeADawg

CallMeADawg

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 26, 2012
Messages
2,382
Reaction score
1,964
cesame":tubo96b9 said:
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.
 
OP
OP
CallMeADawg

CallMeADawg

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 26, 2012
Messages
2,382
Reaction score
1,964
JSeahawks":3e8m1e89 said:
HawkWow":3e8m1e89 said:
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.
 

Throwdown

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
24,042
Reaction score
1,325
Location
Tacoma, 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.
 

HawkWow

New member
Joined
Sep 3, 2012
Messages
6,740
Reaction score
0
Location
The 5-0
JSeahawks":39d1xvak said:
HawkWow":39d1xvak said:
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).
 
OP
OP
CallMeADawg

CallMeADawg

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 26, 2012
Messages
2,382
Reaction score
1,964
Throwdown":3bfciltc said:
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.
 

JSeahawks

New member
Joined
Mar 1, 2007
Messages
24,093
Reaction score
1
Location
Milwaukie, Oregon
HawkWow":2axm1j9p said:
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.
 
OP
OP
CallMeADawg

CallMeADawg

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 26, 2012
Messages
2,382
Reaction score
1,964
JSeahawks":1z582nqv said:
HawkWow":1z582nqv said:
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? :)
 

HawkWow

New member
Joined
Sep 3, 2012
Messages
6,740
Reaction score
0
Location
The 5-0
JSeahawks":305ovmx9 said:
HawkWow":305ovmx9 said:
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.
 
OP
OP
CallMeADawg

CallMeADawg

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 26, 2012
Messages
2,382
Reaction score
1,964
Ohio State, IMO, is the best team in the NCAA.
 

JSeahawks

New member
Joined
Mar 1, 2007
Messages
24,093
Reaction score
1
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.
 
OP
OP
CallMeADawg

CallMeADawg

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 26, 2012
Messages
2,382
Reaction score
1,964
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
 

cesame

New member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
2,013
Reaction score
0
CallMeADawg":tkfacwqu said:
cesame":tkfacwqu said:
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:
 

SeatownJay

Active member
Joined
Mar 4, 2007
Messages
10,745
Reaction score
6
Location
Hagerstown, MD
CallMeADawg":19p7z4t1 said:
Ohio State, IMO, is the best team in the NCAA.
That statement right there invalidates any credibility you might have had concerning college football.
 

cesame

New member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
2,013
Reaction score
0
CallMeADawg":2v07x44u said:
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.
 
OP
OP
CallMeADawg

CallMeADawg

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 26, 2012
Messages
2,382
Reaction score
1,964
SeatownJay":25mzbs7r said:
CallMeADawg":25mzbs7r said:
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