Root for UW to win the Rose for Pac 12 pride?

[HHusky]

As much as we all dislike the Evil Empire, the Ducks are a name brand nationally in a way that UW is not. How do I know? When I walk around or drive around Wichita, Kansas, I see kids wearing Oregon hoodies and I see that neon "O" on cars. I see Georgia in the SEC championship game holding up a sign with four boxes on it for their defensive calls and one of the images is Oregon's "O". Do you know what I don't see? The Husky "W" or logo anywhere around here.

Earlier in the year, when Oregon was 5-1 and fresh off a win against UW, the media was ready to crown them Kings in the North and they had risen to #12 in the country. As long as the Ducks don't suck, they get the benefit of the doubt. Even with a record of 6-1 and a win over those mighty Ducks, the Cougs were ranked #14 the following week.

Stanford is tricky. They've been lurking in the shadows of UW and WSU the last couple years (although they managed to sneak in the back door and win the north last year. Having lost to WSU several years in a row and splitting with the Huskies, they are definitely struggling to maintain their brand. They definitely do not have the national brand recognition that Oregon has.

We’re talking about two different things. College football is a game of tradition. Oregon gets recognized for its recent success (and avant-garde fashion sense) but would never be listed above the UW as a traditional power on the West Coast. The UW is a bigger deal in terms of what matters to the national consciousness of the conference.

 

[HHusky]

That's very debatable. I guess it depends on what you mean by "living memory".

Not hard. All college football fans now living. There are quite a few of us Baby Boomers. That’s why we got that label.

 

[Fab5Coug]

We’re talking about two different things. College football is a game of tradition. Oregon gets recognized for its recent success (and avant-garde fashion sense) but would never be listed above the UW as a traditional power on the West Coast. The UW is a bigger deal in terms of what matters to the national consciousness of the conference.

Oregon's "recent" success has been going on for about 24 years now.

Imagine if UW went straight from Don James to Chris Petersen, with no Gilby/Willingham/etc years in between. That's almost Oregon's run at this point.

 

[Flatlandcoug]

We’re talking about two different things. College football is a game of tradition. Oregon gets recognized for its recent success (and avant-garde fashion sense) but would never be listed above the UW as a traditional power on the West Coast. The UW is a bigger deal in terms of what matters to the national consciousness of the conference.

Dream on, big fella. I'd agree that people over 45 years old likely view UW as a traditional power compared to Oregon. Under that age? NOPE. Frankly, you might have to go to people over 50 years old to get to people who value the UW brand the way that you do. I have no problem admitting that the mutts have a better brand than WSU right now. That gap is closing with every year that Leach is here and all it's gonna take is a couple big wins for us to start passing you.

You talk about avant-garde fashion sense.....but that's what matters.

 

[HHusky]

Oregon's "recent" success has been going on for about 24 years now.

Imagine if UW went straight from Don James to Chris Petersen, with no Gilby/Willingham/etc years in between. That's almost Oregon's run at this point.

Not even USC has an uninterrupted 24 year run of national relevance, much less Oregon. Oregon mattered nationally in 2000-2001 and during much of Chip Kelly’s tenure plus 2014. Washington mattered nationally in 1959-60, 1982-84, 1990-92, 2000, and 2016. That’s cross generational periods of success. It’s national consciousness building.

 

[HHusky]

Dream on, big fella. I'd agree that people over 45 years old likely view UW as a traditional power compared to Oregon. Under that age? NOPE. Frankly, you might have to go to people over 50 years old to get to people who value the UW brand the way that you do. I have no problem admitting that the mutts have a better brand than WSU right now. That gap is closing with every year that Leach is here and all it's gonna take is a couple big wins for us to start passing you.

You talk about avant-garde fashion sense.....but that's what matters.

Dream on, big fella. I'd agree that people over 45 years old likely view UW as a traditional power compared to Oregon. Under that age? NOPE. Frankly, you might have to go to people over 50 years old to get to people who value the UW brand the way that you do. I have no problem admitting that the mutts have a better brand than WSU right now. That gap is closing with every year that Leach is here and all it's gonna take is a couple big wins for us to start passing you.

You talk about avant-garde fashion sense.....but that's what matters.

I’m curious how the gap closes without WSU ever beating the UW. I wonder if any voters in the polls are over 45. How about bowl selection committees? What is the median age of all Americans?

 

[Coug90]

We’re talking about two different things. College football is a game of tradition. Oregon gets recognized for its recent success (and avant-garde fashion sense) but would never be listed above the UW as a traditional power on the West Coast. The UW is a bigger deal in terms of what matters to the national consciousness of the conference.

UW is in an interesting category for sure. A historically successful program for a good chunk of beginning of the TV era of college football, then basically dropping off the map and becoming completely irrelevant for about 25 years, now having a nice little 3 year run. I think based on what transpired in the decades prior to Petterson you are probably giving yourself too much credit. The average east coast football fan may have vague memories of UW glory from the 80s 90s, but mostly thinks of a mediocre program that’s seeing some recent success...more of an upstart. Oregon has become a national brand because of Nike and the decade+ of 10+ win seasons, rose bowls, BCS, playoffs, NC game, etc...not to mention the fancy unis that kids dig.

 

[extermin8r]

It’s national consciousness building.

Hilarious. You should travel outside the PNW sometime so you don't sound so ignorant.

 

[HHusky]

https://www.google.com/amp/s/syndic...ollege-football-programs-of-all-time.amp.html

One can quibble about the order, but relative positions of UW and Oregon are about right. Oregon probably moves up for what’s gone on since this was written, but so does UW.

 

[Fab5Coug]

Not even USC has an uninterrupted 24 year run of national relevance, much less Oregon. Oregon mattered nationally in 2000-2001 and during much of Chip Kelly’s tenure plus 2014. Washington mattered nationally in 1959-60, 1982-84, 1990-92, 2000, and 2016. That’s cross generational periods of success. It’s national consciousness building.

That's what, 10 seasons in almost 60 years?

I'm sorry, but I don't think Joe Blow football fan could tell you anything UW has done other than "make the playoff a couple years ago, and go to some Rose Bowls back in the 90s."

I don't think UW's national brand is as strong as you think it is. It certainly has not been markedly stronger than Oregon's over the past couple decades.

 

[HHusky]

I don't think UW's national brand is as strong as you think it is. It certainly has not been markedly stronger than Oregon's over the past couple decades.[/QUOTE]

If the consciousness of thirty somethings and younger was all that mattered, Daddy wouldn’t be President and UCLA would never have come up in this conversation.

 

[cr8zyncalif]

Interesting string & original question. 3 answers.

Do I care enough about the PAC rep to root for UW? No.

But....do I dislike tOSU enough to root for UW? Probably. That goes back to Woody Hayes and hasn't changed much since then.

Do I care enough about our final ranking being above UW to root for tOSU. That is the hard question, since a very close win by tOSU might still leave UW ranked above us....so if this is my motivation I have to root for tOSU to stomp UW. And I don't like tOSU. But the answer to that is yes, since I would love to see WSU end the season ranked above UW. That is not specifically because I dislike UW; it is more because I want us to finish as the top ranked PAC team this year.

Net result; we beat ISU and tOSO stomps UW.

 

[extermin8r]

https://www.google.com/amp/s/syndic...ollege-football-programs-of-all-time.amp.html

One can quibble about the order, but relative positions of UW and Oregon are about right. Oregon probably moves up for what’s gone on since this was written, but so does UW.

I do appreciate the effort, but some random dudes arbitrary rankings from almost a decade ago won't cut it. AP and Coaches rankings is a better assessment of "National" prestige.

Here's 2010-2017 AP totals:
Rank Team Points Last Year
1 Alabama 181 1
2 Ohio State 146 2
3 Oklahoma 126 6
4 Clemson 121 7
5 Stanford 118 4
6 Oregon 117 3
7 Florida State 104 5
8 Michigan St 101 8
9 LSU 97 9
10 TCU 95 10
11 Wisconsin 93 11
12 Oklahoma St 78 12
13 Auburn 71 16
14 USC 70 15
15 Georgia 69 19
16 South Carolina 61 13
T17 Baylor 58 14
T17 Notre Dame 58 20
19 Boise State 57 17
20 Miss State 49 21
21 Michigan 46 18
T22 UCF 41 32
T22 Missouri 41 22
24 Penn State 37 33
25 Texas A&M 36 23
Others Receiving Votes
26 Arkansas 35 26
T27 Kansas State 33 27
T27 Washington 33 27
30 Louisville 31 26

2000-2009 AP:
1 Texas 190
2 Oklahoma 170
3 USC 168
4 Ohio State 158
5 Florida 141
6 LSU 134
7 Georgia 127
8 Miami 125
9 Virginia Tech 122
10 Michigan 96
11 Boise State 93
12 Oregon 90
13 Auburn 84
14 Iowa 79
15 Alabama 78
16 Florida State 71
17 Penn State 70
18 TCU 67
19 West Virginia 62
20 Tennessee 61
21 Utah 59
22 Nebraska 57
23 Louisville 56
24 Wisconsin 54
25 Washington State 49
OTHERS RECEIVING VOTES
BYU 48
Kansas State 48
Notre Dame 46
Boston College 39
Maryland 37
Mississippi 37
Texas Tech 37
Cincinnati 36
Oregon State 36
California 30
Washington 30
Missouri 29
Georgia Tech 28

I know what you're thinking, what about the 90's? You win that round, UW is #14, just behind the prestigious, nationally noteworthy programs of Kansas State and Colorado. Regardless, 20+ years of mediocrity is a long time to erode any prestige your program had in the pre-internet era.

 

[BleedCrimsonandGray]

As much as we all dislike the Evil Empire, the Ducks are a name brand nationally in a way that UW is not. How do I know? When I walk around or drive around Wichita, Kansas, I see kids wearing Oregon hoodies and I see that neon "O" on cars. I see Georgia in the SEC championship game holding up a sign with four boxes on it for their defensive calls and one of the images is Oregon's "O". Do you know what I don't see? The Husky "W" or logo anywhere around here.

Earlier in the year, when Oregon was 5-1 and fresh off a win against UW, the media was ready to crown them Kings in the North and they had risen to #12 in the country. As long as the Ducks don't suck, they get the benefit of the doubt. Even with a record of 6-1 and a win over those mighty Ducks, the Cougs were ranked #14 the following week.

Stanford is tricky. They've been lurking in the shadows of UW and WSU the last couple years (although they managed to sneak in the back door and win the north last year. Having lost to WSU several years in a row and splitting with the Huskies, they are definitely struggling to maintain their brand. They definitely do not have the national brand recognition that Oregon has.

They've been marketing and branding their school for 20 years now. The big splash was the Heisman poster in times square (heaven forbid we ever do something even 1/2 that audacious... wouldn't want to draw attention to ourselves). Doesn't hurt to have uncle Phil footing the bill either, I suppose.

 

[HHusky]

I do appreciate the effort, but some random dudes arbitrary rankings from almost a decade ago won't cut it. AP and Coaches rankings is a better assessment of "National" prestige.

Here's 2010-2017 AP totals:
Rank Team Points Last Year
1 Alabama 181 1
2 Ohio State 146 2
3 Oklahoma 126 6
4 Clemson 121 7
5 Stanford 118 4
6 Oregon 117 3
7 Florida State 104 5
8 Michigan St 101 8
9 LSU 97 9
10 TCU 95 10
11 Wisconsin 93 11
12 Oklahoma St 78 12
13 Auburn 71 16
14 USC 70 15
15 Georgia 69 19
16 South Carolina 61 13
T17 Baylor 58 14
T17 Notre Dame 58 20
19 Boise State 57 17
20 Miss State 49 21
21 Michigan 46 18
T22 UCF 41 32
T22 Missouri 41 22
24 Penn State 37 33
25 Texas A&M 36 23
Others Receiving Votes
26 Arkansas 35 26
T27 Kansas State 33 27
T27 Washington 33 27
30 Louisville 31 26

2000-2009 AP:
1 Texas 190
2 Oklahoma 170
3 USC 168
4 Ohio State 158
5 Florida 141
6 LSU 134
7 Georgia 127
8 Miami 125
9 Virginia Tech 122
10 Michigan 96
11 Boise State 93
12 Oregon 90
13 Auburn 84
14 Iowa 79
15 Alabama 78
16 Florida State 71
17 Penn State 70
18 TCU 67
19 West Virginia 62
20 Tennessee 61
21 Utah 59
22 Nebraska 57
23 Louisville 56
24 Wisconsin 54
25 Washington State 49
OTHERS RECEIVING VOTES
BYU 48
Kansas State 48
Notre Dame 46
Boston College 39
Maryland 37
Mississippi 37
Texas Tech 37
Cincinnati 36
Oregon State 36
California 30
Washington 30
Missouri 29
Georgia Tech 28

I know what you're thinking, what about the 90's? You win that round, UW is #14, just behind the prestigious, nationally noteworthy programs of Kansas State and Colorado. Regardless, 20+ years of mediocrity is a long time to erode any prestige your program had in the pre-internet era.

If we’d ever had 20+ years of mediocrity, you’d be making some sort of point.

 

[HHusky]

They've been marketing and branding their school for 20 years now. The big splash was the Heisman poster in times square (heaven forbid we ever do something even 1/2 that audacious... wouldn't want to draw attention to ourselves). Doesn't hurt to have uncle Phil footing the bill either, I suppose.

Top of mind isn’t the same as the thing we’re discussing.

 

[PINGDUDE4]

Hilarious. You should travel outside the PNW sometime so you don't sound so ignorant.

This guy H Husky is best example of a delusional fan that there is on any board that I read. I have no doubt that UW is a strong brand in a very narrow sliver of territory known as Seattle and its suburbs but outside of that not so much.

But enough of a debate on this board. I challenge H Husky if he is so bold to venture over to the Rival's Main Board ( which is the home of the largest national cross section of college football fans ever assembled on-line) and pose to that wide audience the question of how much the Washington Huskies are in the "National Consciousness" of the average college football fan. I would take my chances of him just comparing UW to WSU over there , but that is really not a fair fight , because Leach is the patron saint of that large board. So I will make it easier just simply pose the question like this : " Hey I'm a Husky fan and I would like to know how strongly everyone here feels about the Huskies on a National level ?" C'mon H Husky I know you got in you and I double "dog" dare you to start that very thread on the National Rivals Main Board.

 

[HHusky]

I do appreciate the effort, but some random dudes arbitrary rankings from almost a decade ago won't cut it. AP and Coaches rankings is a better assessment of "National" prestige.

Here's 2010-2017 AP totals:
Rank Team Points Last Year
1 Alabama 181 1
2 Ohio State 146 2
3 Oklahoma 126 6
4 Clemson 121 7
5 Stanford 118 4
6 Oregon 117 3
7 Florida State 104 5
8 Michigan St 101 8
9 LSU 97 9
10 TCU 95 10
11 Wisconsin 93 11
12 Oklahoma St 78 12
13 Auburn 71 16
14 USC 70 15
15 Georgia 69 19
16 South Carolina 61 13
T17 Baylor 58 14
T17 Notre Dame 58 20
19 Boise State 57 17
20 Miss State 49 21
21 Michigan 46 18
T22 UCF 41 32
T22 Missouri 41 22
24 Penn State 37 33
25 Texas A&M 36 23
Others Receiving Votes
26 Arkansas 35 26
T27 Kansas State 33 27
T27 Washington 33 27
30 Louisville 31 26

2000-2009 AP:
1 Texas 190
2 Oklahoma 170
3 USC 168
4 Ohio State 158
5 Florida 141
6 LSU 134
7 Georgia 127
8 Miami 125
9 Virginia Tech 122
10 Michigan 96
11 Boise State 93
12 Oregon 90
13 Auburn 84
14 Iowa 79
15 Alabama 78
16 Florida State 71
17 Penn State 70
18 TCU 67
19 West Virginia 62
20 Tennessee 61
21 Utah 59
22 Nebraska 57
23 Louisville 56
24 Wisconsin 54
25 Washington State 49
OTHERS RECEIVING VOTES
BYU 48
Kansas State 48
Notre Dame 46
Boston College 39
Maryland 37
Mississippi 37
Texas Tech 37
Cincinnati 36
Oregon State 36
California 30
Washington 30
Missouri 29
Georgia Tech 28

I know what you're thinking, what about the 90's? You win that round, UW is #14, just behind the prestigious, nationally noteworthy programs of Kansas State and Colorado. Regardless, 20+ years of mediocrity is a long time to erode any prestige your program had in the pre-internet era.

Btw, I noticed you avoided the all-time category, which places Washington, Oregon and Stanford in pretty much their proper relative positions.

 

[roses04]

Oregon has a much bigger national following than the dogs. Unlike most people on this board who have been following college football since, 90's,80's,70's and even 60's and 50's. A majority of college football fans today are millennials, they didn't start watching the game until after Y2K. Oregon had a 12 game win streak over the dogs until 3 or 4 years ago, other than the 2000 Rose Bowl the dogs were irrelevant for the first decade, and until Peterson showed up 4-5 years ago there was nothing to talk about. And the CF playoff has made it worse.

Asked a big Husky fan in the office ( a 30 something), and a season ticket holder, if they were going to the Rose Bowl, and this is the response. "I went to the playoff game against 'Bama, and unless they are in the playoff why bother" That is your modern day Husky fan. It pained me to hear that, as I have always felt the Rose Bowl was and is one of the best bowls ever. The lack of respect for the Rose Bowl is amazing to me, but common amongst the millennial Dog fan of today. For that reason alone I am cheering on the Buckeyes.

 

[HHusky]

Oregon has a much bigger national following than the dogs. Unlike most people on this board who have been following college footballs since, 90's,80's,70's and even 60's and 50's. A majority of college football fans today are millennials, they didn't start watching the came until after Y2K. Oregon had a 12 game win streak over the dogs until 3 or 4 years ago, other than the 2000 Rose Bowl the dogs were irrelevant for the first decade, and until Peterson showed up 4-5 years ago there was nothing to talk about. And the CF playoff has made it worse.

Asked a big Husky fan in the office ( a 30 something), and a season ticket holder, if they were going to the Rose Bowl, and this is the response. "I went to the playoff game against 'Bama, and unless they are in the playoff why bother" That is your modern day Husky fan. It pained me to hear that, as I have always felt the Rose Bowl was and is one of the best bowls ever. The lack of respect for the Rose Bowl is amazing to me, but common amongst the millennial Dog fan of today. For that reason alone I am cheering on the Buckeyes.

Why? It's the f--ing Big10 as much as anyone who lobbied for this silly playoff nonsense and devalued our traditions.

 

[Fab5Coug]

If we’d ever had 20+ years of mediocrity, you’d be making some sort of point.

What would you call the period of time between Don James & Chris Petersen? UW was 130-123 in that span. They won a Rose Bowl.

Don't get me wrong, WSU would have gladly taken that run over what we did during the span, but if that's not "mediocre", then what do you want to call it?

 

[HHusky]

What would you call the period of time between Don James & Chris Petersen? UW was 130-123 in that span. They won a Rose Bowl.

Don't get me wrong, WSU would have gladly taken that run over what we did during the span, but if that's not "mediocre", then what do you want to call it?

You answered your own question. We won a Rose Bowl.

 

[extermin8r]

Btw, I noticed you avoided the all-time category, which places Washington, Oregon and Stanford in pretty much their proper relative positions.

Yes, UW's rankings 30+ years in the past in times of no scholarship restrictions, etc are very important to perceptions in the college football landscape of 2018. But if you want to look at that, at least now we can admit that UW is a second tier program, all time, behind modern powerhouses like Iowa, Tennessee, Miami, UCLA, and Arkansas.

Here's AP all time:

Rank Teams Points Previous Rank
1 Oklahoma 1160 1
2 Alabama 1038 2
3 Ohio State 1029 3
4 Michigan 973 4
5 Notre Dame 954 5
6 USC 832 6
7 Nebraska 783 7
8 Texas 772 8
9 Tennessee 686 9
10 Penn State 685 10
11 LSU 633 11
T12 Auburn 572 13
T12 Georgia 572 14
14 Florida State 563 12
15 Miami 530 15
16 UCLA 503 16
17 Florida 499 17
18 Michigan State 454 18
19 Arkansas 439 19
20 Clemson 399 20
21 Texas A&M 365 21
T22 Washington 363 22
T22 Wisconsin 363 24
24 Ole Miss 347 23
25 Georgia Tech 343 25

Here's Coaches all time:

Rank Teams Points Previous Rank
25 Texas A&M 283 SEC 25
24 Clemson 312 ACC 24
23 Washington 315 Pac-12 23
22 Ole Miss 319 SEC 22
21 Iowa 320 Big Ten 21
20 Wisconsin 387 Big Ten 20
19 Arkansas 428 SEC 18
18 Michigan State 436 Big Ten 19
17 Florida 464 SEC 17
16 UCLA 475 Pac-12 16
15 Auburn 494 SEC 15
14 Georgia 511 SEC 14
13 LSU 525 SEC 13
12 Miami 527 ACC 12
11 Tennessee 551 SEC 11
10 Florida State 617 ACC 10
9 Notre Dame 669 Independent 9
8 Penn State 689 Big Ten 8
7 Texas 691 Big 12 7
6 USC 731 Pac-12 6
5 Nebraska 736 Big Ten 5
4 Michigan 764 Big Ten 4
3 Alabama 920 SEC 3
2 Ohio State 937 Big Ten 2
1 Oklahoma 960 Big 12 1

 

[HHusky]

Yes, UW's rankings 30+ years in the past in times of no scholarship restrictions, etc are very important to perceptions in the college football landscape of 2018. But if you want to look at that, at least now we can admit that UW is a second tier program, all time, behind modern powerhouses like Iowa, Tennessee, Miami, UCLA, and Arkansas.

Here's AP all time:

Rank Teams Points Previous Rank
1 Oklahoma 1160 1
2 Alabama 1038 2
3 Ohio State 1029 3
4 Michigan 973 4
5 Notre Dame 954 5
6 USC 832 6
7 Nebraska 783 7
8 Texas 772 8
9 Tennessee 686 9
10 Penn State 685 10
11 LSU 633 11
T12 Auburn 572 13
T12 Georgia 572 14
14 Florida State 563 12
15 Miami 530 15
16 UCLA 503 16
17 Florida 499 17
18 Michigan State 454 18
19 Arkansas 439 19
20 Clemson 399 20
21 Texas A&M 365 21
T22 Washington 363 22
T22 Wisconsin 363 24
24 Ole Miss 347 23
25 Georgia Tech 343 25

Here's Coaches all time:

Rank Teams Points Previous Rank
25 Texas A&M 283 SEC 25
24 Clemson 312 ACC 24
23 Washington 315 Pac-12 23
22 Ole Miss 319 SEC 22
21 Iowa 320 Big Ten 21
20 Wisconsin 387 Big Ten 20
19 Arkansas 428 SEC 18
18 Michigan State 436 Big Ten 19
17 Florida 464 SEC 17
16 UCLA 475 Pac-12 16
15 Auburn 494 SEC 15
14 Georgia 511 SEC 14
13 LSU 525 SEC 13
12 Miami 527 ACC 12
11 Tennessee 551 SEC 11
10 Florida State 617 ACC 10
9 Notre Dame 669 Independent 9
8 Penn State 689 Big Ten 8
7 Texas 691 Big 12 7
6 USC 731 Pac-12 6
5 Nebraska 736 Big Ten 5
4 Michigan 764 Big Ten 4
3 Alabama 920 SEC 3
2 Ohio State 937 Big Ten 2
1 Oklahoma 960 Big 12 1

And at one time Minnesota would have been ahead of us too. Are you really so young that you don't know Tennessee and Arkansas both have a rich history?

 

[extermin8r]

And at one time Minnesota would have been ahead of us too. Are you really so young that you don't know Tennessee and Arkansas have a rich history?

I know nothing about Arkansas "rich" history but know off the top of my head a UT championship in Bill Clinton era and maybe one with Fulmer, and just pathetic football since. The point is it's so long ago I have to look it up, and I'm not an 18 year old recruit deciding on where to play football. Notre Dame, Michigan fans also love to point to millions of wins mostly coming from the pre color TV era and their fanbases are a laughingstock for riding historic records in a time of modern dominance by many other noteworthy programs. I look at UW fans the same way, except worse, because you don't even hold a candle to the "rich history" of true blue blood programs.

 

[HHusky]

I know nothing about Arkansas "rich" history but know off the top of my head a UT championship in Bill Clinton era and maybe one with Fulmer, and just pathetic football since. The point is it's so long ago I have to look it up, and I'm not an 18 year old recruit deciding on where to play football. Notre Dame, Michigan fans also love to point to millions of wins mostly coming from the pre color TV era and their fanbases are a laughingstock for riding historic records in a time of modern dominance by many other noteworthy programs. I look at UW fans the same way, except worse, because you don't even hold a candle to the "rich history" of true blue blood programs.

18 years olds didn't decide your CFP ranking either. This isn't about the perceptions of recruits. You really need to pick a topic and stick with it.

 

[OrangeGravy]

As much as we all dislike the Evil Empire, the Ducks are a name brand nationally in a way that UW is not. How do I know? When I walk around or drive around Wichita, Kansas, I see kids wearing Oregon hoodies and I see that neon "O" on cars. I see Georgia in the SEC championship game holding up a sign with four boxes on it for their defensive calls and one of the images is Oregon's "O". Do you know what I don't see? The Husky "W" or logo anywhere around here.

Earlier in the year, when Oregon was 5-1 and fresh off a win against UW, the media was ready to crown them Kings in the North and they had risen to #12 in the country. As long as the Ducks don't suck, they get the benefit of the doubt. Even with a record of 6-1 and a win over those mighty Ducks, the Cougs were ranked #14 the following week.

Stanford is tricky. They've been lurking in the shadows of UW and WSU the last couple years (although they managed to sneak in the back door and win the north last year. Having lost to WSU several years in a row and splitting with the Huskies, they are definitely struggling to maintain their brand. They definitely do not have the national brand recognition that Oregon has.

Stanford carries a different kind of perception nationally, at least to fans from other conferences. Stanford is respected as the 1 tough ,hard-nosed team in the Pac. I've read a lot of comments eluding to that. Of course that has died down in the last couple of years, but they were the only team that other fans around the country ever thought had a chance to match up with other good teams.

 

[TZCoug84]

I'm of the opinion that the only thing that matters (90%) to a conference's reputation is how the teams perform that have even somewhat of a national awareness. This bowl season for the Pac, to me, rides on the backs of UW, UO, and Stanford. Those are the only teams that outsiders have acknowledged as being good in the past. If they each win it help the conference rep. If everyone else wins it helps, but to a much lesser extent. Now if those 3 win and everyone else wins that gives the rep an extra boost. Conversely if those 3 lose and everyone else wins, it's a push nationally speaking.

So do you care enough about the conference rep to root for UW?

It's a tough call for me because I hate OSU/Urban, so I'm neutral right now. I hope Oregon and Stanford do damage.

I will root for Washington because I feel sorry for them because: (a) it's a commuter school; and (b) I am troubled by their fight song, "Bend Over Washington".

 

[chipdouglas]

I don't know why anyone WOULDN'T root for the UW. They keep telling me they root for us every week except for the Apple Cup!

 

[HHusky]

Stanford carries a different kind of perception nationally, at least to fans from other conferences. Stanford is respected as the 1 tough ,hard-nosed team in the Pac. I've read a lot of comments eluding to that. Of course that has died down in the last couple of years, but they were the only team that other fans around the country ever thought had a chance to match up with other good teams.

If you're maybe 15 years old, you think of Stanford as the hard-nosed team.

 

[HHusky]

I don't know why anyone WOULDN'T root for the UW. They keep telling me they root for us every week except for the Apple Cup!

It's more fun to beat you when you're having a good season. Really.

 

[Coug90]

If we’d ever had 20+ years of mediocrity, you’d be making some sort of point.

denial is the first stage my friend. You are making progress.

 

[CognitiveDissonance]

denial is the first stage my friend. You are making progress.

Boy... this is a weird, weird thread. I'd be curious to see what other fans of programs in Pac 12 would think of the insanity being mentioned here.

Did someone really say that WSU is closing the gap on UW? You're serious? I read that and almost spit out my water... Petersen has curb stomped Leach in 5 straight games... I mean, you're joking right? You've seen first hand the difference in the talent level and coaching... shit... just look at the bowl games we've gone to compared to the Cougs...

I want to ask Cougars on this board an honest question:

Do you really believe, and please be honest, that the Cougars are going to pass the Huskies as a program during Petersen's time at the helm? Please tell me you don't think that's actually going to happen... please... there isn't a serious football fan outside of the Palouse who believes that insanity.

Do you really not see the talent headed UW's way? Petersen had his best recruiting class of his tenure in 2018 and nobody from that class has played... the 2019 recruiting class is even better and we're about to add another 4-star corner in McDuffie, most probably a 4-star edge rusher and maybe a 5-star WR in Ford who doesn't seem to like what's going on at SC... the following year we're the favorites to add Kelly Ringo, a 5-star corner... not to mention 2 or 3 other 5-stars who UW is getting serious consideration from... no 5-stars were on the radar during Petersens' first few years.

The program is graduating 3-star talent to the 1st and 2nd rounds of the NFL draft and recruits are taking notice. C'mon guys... you weren't able to compete with Petersen's early recruiting classes... you certainly wont now.

Jacob Eason is projected to go in the first round of the draft in 2020... and our QB room features 3x 4-stars in Sirmon, Yankoff and Morris + we're getting Huard's kid, a 5-star in 2022...

The Dawgs have had a shit QB the last 2 seasons and made it to the Fiesta and Rose Bowl... The Cougs are a bad QB away from multiple 5-6 win seasons... that's how thin the margin is for you guys.

We're set up for a serious run of years coming up. If you can't see that I want to know what you're smoking.

I'm just in disbelief with what I'm reading.

 

[CougPatrol]

The UW has had far more success than Stanford or Oregon over the living memory of college football fans generally. In terms of national perception, which was the issue, the UW is a bigger deal.

I agree that UW has had a much stronger football history than Oregon and Stanford over the past several decades, but both the Ducks and Furd are more Nationally relevant today, and by a wide margin. Oregon because of their Nike ties and subsequent fantastic branding of their athletics, and Stanford because of their academic prestige and the National relevance of virtually all of their athletic programs.

UW, and most west coast programs, isn’t on anyone’s radar East of Denver.

 

[CougPatrol]

Jacob Eason is projected to go in the first round of the NFL draft? Who’s projecting that?

 

[OrangeGravy]

It's so funny reading a thread when half the posts are from someone you have on ignore. It's like a little game trying to guess what they said by the responses to it

 

[CognitiveDissonance]

Jacob Eason is projected to go in the first round of the NFL draft? Who’s projecting that?

http://walterfootball.com/draft2020_1.php

http://www.draftblaster.com/2020-nfl-mock-draft/

https://247sports.com/college/georg...son-could-go-1-2-in-2020-NFL-Draft-119411888/

"Where do teams go from here? One high-ranking scout I spoke to last week was nearly giddy talking about the 2020 draft class (yes, they're already looking that far ahead). "That kid at Georgia (Jake Fromm) and the one that left (Jacob Eason) are legit dudes. They could go 1-2 and they were at the same school! Those are the ones to watch."

https://draftwire.usatoday.com/2018/07/09/2019-nfl-draft-early-quarterback-preview/ - believes Eason would be a first rounder in 2020 and calls 2019 thin compared to 2020 class of QB's.

http://www.draftscout.com/ratings/dsprofile.php?pyid=1017483&draftyear=2020&genpos=QB - rated 2 of 103 QB's in 2020 which means first round.

 

[CognitiveDissonance]

I agree that UW has had a much stronger football history than Oregon and Stanford over the past several decades, but both the Ducks and Furd are more Nationally relevant today, and by a wide margin. Oregon because of their Nike ties and subsequent fantastic branding of their athletics, and Stanford because of their academic prestige and the National relevance of virtually all of their athletic programs.

UW, and most west coast programs, isn’t on anyone’s radar East of Denver.

UW is quickly gaining on them though... If these programs continue to go in the wrong direction it could look a lot like what happened to UW from 2003-2009... That 7-year span killed our program's perception.

Oregon: 4-8, 7-6, 8-4... There's no guarantee Cristobal is going to take the program places and if the best they could muster with Herbert is a 19 and 18 win/loss record I'd hate to see what they do with someone less talented. It's not the same program w/o Kelly. Phil Knight ain't getting any younger. Although it looks like losing Taggert was about the best thing that could have happened to them.

Stanford: 9-5, 8-4... seems Shaw is losing his touch a bit... kind of like Helfrich did after Kelly... riding the coat tails of Harbaugh. They no longer have that physical presence on D that Harbaugh made famous... and their power run game has gone down the trash - they were 122nd in the nation in rushing this year despite signing a bevy of 5-star talent on the O-line... that's a clear sign they've lost their identity and are headed places they don't wanna go.

I wonder what Alabama's perception as a program was from '97-'07... my guess is not great. Hiring Saban sure did wonders to change it back... I think Pete is on a similar path... no, not as good Saban, you can't repeat success of that magnitude... but similar. In 3 years getting to the playoff, Fiesta and Rose Bowl has almost certainly put us back square in the national spotlight... and I don't see those results changing any time soon.

 

[Flatlandcoug]

UW is quickly gaining on them though... If these programs continue to go in the wrong direction it could look a lot like what happened to UW from 2003-2009... That 7-year span killed our program's perception.

Oregon: 4-8, 7-6, 8-4... There's no guarantee Cristobal is going to take the program places and if the best they could muster with Herbert is a 19 and 18 win/loss record I'd hate to see what they do with someone less talented. It's not the same program w/o Kelly. Phil Knight ain't getting any younger. Although it looks like losing Taggert was about the best thing that could have happened to them.

Stanford: 9-5, 8-4... seems Shaw is losing his touch a bit... kind of like Helfrich did after Kelly... riding the coat tails of Harbaugh. They no longer have that physical presence on D that Harbaugh made famous... and their power run game has gone down the trash - they were 122nd in the nation in rushing this year despite signing a bevy of 5-star talent on the O-line... that's a clear sign they've lost their identity and are headed places they don't wanna go.

I wonder what Alabama's perception as a program was from '97-'07... my guess is not great. Hiring Saban sure did wonders to change it back... I think Pete is on a similar path... no, not as good Saban, you can't repeat success of that magnitude... but similar. In 3 years getting to the playoff, Fiesta and Rose Bowl has almost certainly put us back square in the national spotlight... and I don't see those results changing any time soon.

Look, it's more beef stool from CohesiveDiarrhea! I will give you credit, contrary to your delusional mutt friend, you at least understand that UW is trying to catch up to Oregon and Stanford. The Oregon brand has certainly faded in the past few years and Stanford appears to be in danger of going that way and that has helped UW close the gap. I like how you say that Shaw was riding Harbaugh's coat tails though. He's been coach for 8 freakin' years at Stanford and been there longer than Harbaugh was. I agree that Helfrich was obviously a fraud, but comparing Shaw to him is pretty damned stupid, but something I'd expect from a mutt. Everyone thought that Shaw was riding coat tails at first, but when Stanford finished #3 FIVE FREAKIN' YEARS after Harbaugh left, that's different. It's funny to look at Stanford as "losing their identity" and struggling, and then you realize that if Stanford wins their bowl game, their "down year" will equal UW's best season between 2002 and 2015 and your "elite program" will only be 1/2 game ahead of them in overall W/L total this year. Yep....way down.

 

[kougkurt]

Boy... this is a weird, weird thread. I'd be curious to see what other fans of programs in Pac 12 would think of the insanity being mentioned here.

Did someone really say that WSU is closing the gap on UW? You're serious? I read that and almost spit out my water... Petersen has curb stomped Leach in 5 straight games... I mean, you're joking right? You've seen first hand the difference in the talent level and coaching... shit... just look at the bowl games we've gone to compared to the Cougs...

I want to ask Cougars on this board an honest question:

Do you really believe, and please be honest, that the Cougars are going to pass the Huskies as a program during Petersen's time at the helm? Please tell me you don't think that's actually going to happen... please... there isn't a serious football fan outside of the Palouse who believes that insanity.

Do you really not see the talent headed UW's way? Petersen had his best recruiting class of his tenure in 2018 and nobody from that class has played... the 2019 recruiting class is even better and we're about to add another 4-star corner in McDuffie, most probably a 4-star edge rusher and maybe a 5-star WR in Ford who doesn't seem to like what's going on at SC... the following year we're the favorites to add Kelly Ringo, a 5-star corner... not to mention 2 or 3 other 5-stars who UW is getting serious consideration from... no 5-stars were on the radar during Petersens' first few years.

The program is graduating 3-star talent to the 1st and 2nd rounds of the NFL draft and recruits are taking notice. C'mon guys... you weren't able to compete with Petersen's early recruiting classes... you certainly wont now.

Jacob Eason is projected to go in the first round of the draft in 2020... and our QB room features 3x 4-stars in Sirmon, Yankoff and Morris + we're getting Huard's kid, a 5-star in 2022...

The Dawgs have had a shit QB the last 2 seasons and made it to the Fiesta and Rose Bowl... The Cougs are a bad QB away from multiple 5-6 win seasons... that's how thin the margin is for you guys.

We're set up for a serious run of years coming up. If you can't see that I want to know what you're smoking.

I'm just in disbelief with what I'm reading.

3 points

1) You do realize Sam is Damon’s kiid
2 Jacob Eason has been discused at great length in many threads.
3) A rivals ranking of 5.7 is really a 4 star