Squaloring about ranking, Alamo Bowl

[chipdouglas]

We make choices (weak non-con), which is fine. But they come at a potential price and this year we are paying it.

No we're not. Kicking off our season with a road loss to the SEC will not take us as far as opening with 3 guaranteed wins vs chumps. Particularly if you continue to establish 3 wins as your minimum and build off that to get in bowl games every year. The whole strategy here is to become part of the national conversation over a period of years - not to become heroes in 1 season when you pull off the upset @Auburn but lose the next 5 years to open the season. Even if we became Alabama caliber, why needlessly risk a loss and get behind the 8-ball Week 1? SEC has shown that risk aversion is the best long-term strategy.

 

[Coug90]

Woah, testy, testy.

Yeah, the Auburn loss doesn't look great now. And I would say that if the Huskies had lost 1 less game in conference, but failed to beat the Cougars, we should not/would not be considered for a NY6 bowl game... you know, kind of like the situation the Cougars are in? Difference is, we played Auburn in Atlanta and that garnered respect.

The Husky program is second rate to what? Alabama? Ohio St.? Clemson? Georgia? Shit, I'll take that. We're in the same boat as Michigan, Penn St. Oklahoma, Notre Dame, USC, LSU... which is great in my eyes. It's certainly not second rate to WSU - I hope that's not what you were inferring.

And no. I'd take a 10-3 Washington who won the AC, played a non-co game @Auburn, won the North, won the Pac 12 Championship and is going to the Rose Bowl over a 10-2 WSU team who played literal garbage in the non-co and is going to a mediocre bowl because it thank you very much.

By that logic Florida wouldn’t be ranked ahead of us seeing as how they played 2 FCS teams and have one more loss. No, our outcome is a direct result of everyone believing our conference is shit. So yes, while we would have preferred to finish the game and win our perceived shitty conference the general perception around the country is that UW is the best of the worst...at best.

You continuously popping off over here pretty much affirms these general insecurities you have about your heroes, so best of luck to you.

 

[dgibbons]

Lol, give it a rest everyone. Yeah we didn’t get the respect that other got because of their conference. But it’s a good bowl.

This team will come out and spank our ass if our fans selling the idea within the program that we deserve better then Iowa St. this is all embarrassing.

You realize the that the 300,000 ticket requests for the 1998 Rose Bowl and tidal wave of euphoria didn't get us the W, right?

 

[CognitiveDissonance]

By that logic Florida wouldn’t be ranked ahead of us seeing as how they played 2 FCS teams and have one more loss. No, our outcome is a direct result of everyone believing our conference is shit. So yes, while we would have preferred to finish the game and win our perceived shitty conference the general perception around the country is that UW is the best of the worst...at best.

You continuously popping off over here pretty much affirms these general insecurities you have about your heroes, so best of luck to you.

Oh I love it.

How great is it that in our conferences "worst" year UW is ranked 9th and gets to compete for a Rose Bowl? Gee... it's a shame that in the conference's "worst" year the Cougs couldn't do the same.

How sad

 

[Loyal Coug]

No we're not. Kicking off our season with a road loss to the SEC will not take us as far as opening with 3 guaranteed wins vs chumps. Particularly if you continue to establish 3 wins as your minimum and build off that to get in bowl games every year. The whole strategy here is to become part of the national conversation over a period of years - not to become heroes in 1 season when you pull off the upset @Auburn but lose the next 5 years to open the season. Even if we became Alabama caliber, why needlessly risk a loss and get behind the 8-ball Week 1? SEC has shown that risk aversion is the best long-term strategy.

Well every article written since the first CFP rankings came out disagrees with you about our non-con schedule hurting us in the rankings.

And I am not arguing against the 3 patsies scheduling theory. I'm just saying don't bitch about getting no respect if you do schedule that way.

And yes I have seen the SEC non-con schedules. They all play at least 3 patsies, although the 4th non-con game tends to be a little more stout. FL-FSU, Clemson-the other USC, Auburn-mutts for example. In fact didn't I read where the SEC requires their teams to play one Power 5 in their non-con schedule?

 

[dgibbons]

Woah, testy, testy.

Yeah, the Auburn loss doesn't look great now. And I would say that if the Huskies had lost 1 less game in conference, but failed to beat the Cougars, we should not/would not be considered for a NY6 bowl game... you know, kind of like the situation the Cougars are in? Difference is, we played Auburn in Atlanta and that garnered respect.

The Husky program is second rate to what? Alabama? Ohio St.? Clemson? Georgia? Shit, I'll take that. We're in the same boat as Michigan, Penn St. Oklahoma, Notre Dame, USC, LSU... which is great in my eyes. It's certainly not second rate to WSU - I hope that's not what you were inferring.

And no. I'd take a 10-3 Washington who won the AC, played a non-co game @Auburn, won the North, won the Pac 12 Championship and is going to the Rose Bowl over a 10-2 WSU team who played literal garbage in the non-co and is going to a mediocre bowl because it thank you very much.

I suspect your team would decline a rematch at say State Farm Stadium this Saturday.

 

[dgibbons]

Well every article written since the first CFP rankings came out disagrees with you about our non-con schedule hurting us in the rankings.

And I am not arguing against the 3 patsies scheduling theory. I'm just saying don't bitch about getting no respect if you do schedule that way.

And yes I have seen the SEC non-con schedules. They all play at least 3 patsies, although the 4th non-con game tends to be a little more stout. FL-FSU, Clemson-the other USC, Auburn-mutts for example. In fact didn't I read where the SEC requires their teams to play one Power 5 in their non-con schedule?

Using OCC schedules as a datapoint is stupid. The Pac-12, Big XII and B1G play 9 conference games. The SEC and ACC play 8. Why compare apples to oranges? If you want to talk about crap OOC schedules, look at the SEC. Florida played two FCS teams. Alabama played The Citadel the week before the Iron Bowl. Auburn played Liberty.

The whole strength of schedule discussion is a self-fulfilling prophecy the SEC perpetuates by playing crap teams OOC, then "beating up" on each other.

 

[CognitiveDissonance]

I suspect your team would decline a rematch at say State Farm Stadium this Saturday.

To the Cougars? Lol college football isn't a backyard beer league where you get a second chance to prove yourself because you want it, pumpkin.

If that were a remote chance in reality, sure, why not? No reason to believe you'd have a shot this coming Saturday either.

"Oh but UW won't get home with 3, UW's pass rush has been mediocre this year, our O-line is better than their d-line, they can't stop Minshew, this year is different, we get to the QB more now, their WR's are mediocre and won't make explosive plays, maybe we'll stop Gaskin." - Coug Fans 2018

Would you say the same BS headed to that rematch?

 

[dgibbons]

To the Cougars? Lol college football isn't a backyard beer league where you get a second chance to prove yourself because you want it, pumpkin.

If that were a remote chance in reality, sure, why not? No reason to believe you'd have a shot this coming Saturday either.

"Oh but UW won't get home with 3, UW's pass rush has been mediocre this year, our O-line is better than their d-line, they can't stop Minshew, this year is different, we get to the QB more now, their WR's are mediocre and won't make explosive plays, maybe we'll stop Gaskin." - Coug Fans 2018

Would you say the same BS headed to that rematch?

Thanks for your confirmation.

 

[chipdouglas]

Well every article written since the first CFP rankings came out disagrees with you about our non-con schedule hurting us in the rankings.

And I am not arguing against the 3 patsies scheduling theory. I'm just saying don't bitch about getting no respect if you do schedule that way.

And yes I have seen the SEC non-con schedules. They all play at least 3 patsies, although the 4th non-con game tends to be a little more stout. FL-FSU, Clemson-the other USC, Auburn-mutts for example. In fact didn't I read where the SEC requires their teams to play one Power 5 in their non-con schedule?

Sportswriters are the gum on the bottom of real journalists' shoes. The fact that you found some dweebs from Bleacher Report, SBNation and God knows where else matters very little to me. If you believe them, the committee would like to walk you through their pristine rankings methodology after their oceanfront Arizona timeshare spiel...

The CFP demonstrated this year that they are not in the rankings business so much as the storytelling business on behalf of big programs: escorting them into undeserved bowl games, rekindling rivalries etc. The SoS is a convenient excuse to velvet rope the who-cares twerps from Pullman. As others have pointed out, the SEC illustrates the fraud of SoS: if you lose it's understandable; if you win, you're that good.

A non-pedigree team like WSU must completely run the table to be in the playoffs. No losses, period. 1 loss gets us NY6 but no playoffs. 2 losses is out of contention for anything meaningful, no exceptions made for extenuating circumstances. There is a higher bar for teams like WSU (and ISU) full stop. It's not like adding a 3rd regular season loss on the road @Georgia would see us hurtling into the playoffs.

 

[CognitiveDissonance]

Thanks for your confirmation.

You're welcome... but sadly for you all you'll have to wait until next year... sorry

Question is, will you have a 5th year transfer QB to save you again? That's gonna be a tough thing to repeat every year, don't ya think?

As for UW... well you know what our situation looks like.

 

[dgibbons]

Sportswriters are the gum on the bottom of real journalists' shoes. The fact that you found some dweebs from Bleacher Report, SBNation and God knows where else matters very little to me. If you believe them, the committee would like to walk you through their pristine rankings methodology after their oceanfront Arizona timeshare spiel...

The CFP demonstrated this year that they are not in the rankings business so much as the storytelling business on behalf of big programs: escorting them into undeserved bowl games, rekindling rivalries etc. The SoS is a convenient excuse to velvet rope the who-cares twerps from Pullman. As others have pointed out, the SEC illustrates the fraud of SoS: if you lose it's understandable; if you win, you're that good.

A non-pedigree team like WSU must completely run the table to be in the playoffs. No losses, period. 1 loss gets us NY6 but no playoffs. 2 losses is out of contention for anything meaningful, no exceptions made for extenuating circumstances. There is a higher bar for teams like WSU (and ISU) full stop. It's not like adding a 3rd regular season loss on the road @Georgia would see us hurtling into the playoffs.

Jon Wilner the Mercury News guy is an AP voter. He moved Georgia up after losing to Alabama, and moved tOSU down after beating Northwestern.

 

[BleedCrimsonandGray]

Well every article written since the first CFP rankings came out disagrees with you about our non-con schedule hurting us in the rankings.

And I am not arguing against the 3 patsies scheduling theory. I'm just saying don't bitch about getting no respect if you do schedule that way.

And yes I have seen the SEC non-con schedules. They all play at least 3 patsies, although the 4th non-con game tends to be a little more stout. FL-FSU, Clemson-the other USC, Auburn-mutts for example. In fact didn't I read where the SEC requires their teams to play one Power 5 in their non-con schedule?

We do play a P5 as our fourth game - its a conference game.

And if its good for the goose, its good for the gander (3 cupcakes). In fact, Bama has shown that it is THE formula for getting to championships every year. Well, that and never leaving your home stadium.

Again, why even rank the P12 as a P5 if we aren't going to get the same consideration as the other 4 conferences? You are basically saying that the P12 has to try extra hard to prove ourselves to the other P5 conferences, which basically makes us a group of five team. Which in fact is actually the case: the P5 doesn't exist, its P4 and group of six. There are many reasons for this, but anyone saying that the P12 has to do extra to garner the consideration of the other conferences is missing the point of having the P5 in the first place.

 

[CognitiveDissonance]

Sportswriters are the gum on the bottom of real journalists' shoes. The fact that you found some dweebs from Bleacher Report, SBNation and God knows where else matters very little to me. If you believe them, the committee would like to walk you through their pristine rankings methodology after their oceanfront Arizona timeshare spiel...

The CFP demonstrated this year that they are not in the rankings business so much as the storytelling business on behalf of big programs: escorting them into undeserved bowl games, rekindling rivalries etc. The SoS is a convenient excuse to velvet rope the who-cares twerps from Pullman. As others have pointed out, the SEC illustrates the fraud of SoS: if you lose it's understandable; if you win, you're that good.

A non-pedigree team like WSU must completely run the table to be in the playoffs. No losses, period. 1 loss gets us NY6 but no playoffs. 2 losses is out of contention for anything meaningful, no exceptions made for extenuating circumstances. There is a higher bar for teams like WSU (and ISU) full stop. It's not like adding a 3rd regular season loss on the road @Georgia would see us hurtling into the playoffs.

Then do yourselves a favor. Schedule a good opponent, beat em, run the table.

Quit crying about not getting respect when you haven't even come close to beating your rival the past 5 years.

 

[chipdouglas]

Jon Wilner the Mercury News guy is an AP voter. He moved Georgia up after losing to Alabama, and moved tOSU down after beating Northwestern.

Yes and: I will grant that in that game, Georgia looked every bit as good as Alabama, and that they are probably a Top 3 team.

Having said that, I know we agree on this: it doesn't make sense to have voters ignore season resumes and re-rank every week starting from scratch*. This literally opens us up to the possibility of #35 getting a couple huge starters back and vaulting into the playoffs. Not that that couldn't technically be the "right" choice in rare years, but it creates a completely subjective mess and basically makes every week before the last irrelevant. Why even play a season if it changes week to week? Just have one P5 vs P5 week and start the playoffs based on how good you think everybody is.

*Not that they do this anyway: they've demonstrated they are ranking based on the past 50 years

 

[chipdouglas]

Then do yourselves a favor. Schedule a good opponent, beat em, run the table.

Quit crying about not getting respect when you haven't even come close to beating your rival the past 5 years.

Cool story, bro.

 

[How_did_this_happen?]

Sportswriters are the gum on the bottom of real journalists' shoes. The fact that you found some dweebs from Bleacher Report, SBNation and God knows where else matters very little to me. If you believe them, the committee would like to walk you through their pristine rankings methodology after their oceanfront Arizona timeshare spiel...

The CFP demonstrated this year that they are not in the rankings business so much as the storytelling business on behalf of big programs: escorting them into undeserved bowl games, rekindling rivalries etc. The SoS is a convenient excuse to velvet rope the who-cares twerps from Pullman. As others have pointed out, the SEC illustrates the fraud of SoS: if you lose it's understandable; if you win, you're that good.

A non-pedigree team like WSU must completely run the table to be in the playoffs. No losses, period. 1 loss gets us NY6 but no playoffs. 2 losses is out of contention for anything meaningful, no exceptions made for extenuating circumstances. There is a higher bar for teams like WSU (and ISU) full stop. It's not like adding a 3rd regular season loss on the road @Georgia would see us hurtling into the playoffs.

Ok...but does anyone here really believe that Alabama and Clemson don't belong in the top four?

 

[CognitiveDissonance]

Cool story, bro.

It is a cool story.

The reason UW got into the playoff is because they beat teams by 28 or more points 7 times. Included in those wins were a then ranked #7 Stanford and #9 ranked Colorado in the P-12 Championship and a #23 ranked WSU. Your wins don't stack up.

The Huskies had a "cupcake" schedule just like WSU... except they actually scheduled a Big-10 opponent for a home and away... not our fault they were trash. And all our non-co games were over by half-time... can't say that about the Coug games.

The Huskies only loss was to a #20 ranked USC team who won the Rose Bowl. Your loss was to a USC team that finished 5-7.

The resumes don't stack up... you would have needed to have blown out the Huskies to have had any say... which we all know wasn't going happen.

 

[chipdouglas]

Ok...but does anyone here really believe that Alabama and Clemson don't belong in the top four?

Not sure I understand the contention? I wouldn't dispute the Top 4 based on resume (even though that's not what the committee says they're doing). It's where you get to 5-10 - Michigan, Florida, Oklahoma, Ohio State - where it's much less clear and the committee is falling back on various biases IMO.

 

[chipdouglas]

It is a cool story.

The reason UW got into the playoff is because they beat teams by 28 or more points 7 times. Included in those wins were a then ranked #7 Stanford and #9 ranked Colorado in the P-12 Championship and a #23 ranked WSU. None of your wins were over any team as highly ranked.

The Huskies had a "cupcake" schedule just like WSU... except they actually scheduled a Big-10 opponent for a home and away... not our fault they were trash. And all our non-co games were over by half-time... can't say that about the Coug games.

The Huskies only loss was to a #20 ranked USC team who won the Rose Bowl. Your loss was to a USC team that finished 5-7.

The resumes don't stack up... you would have needed to have blown out the Huskies to have had any say... which we all know wasn't going happen.

Cool story, bro.

 

[How_did_this_happen?]

Not sure I understand the contention? I wouldn't dispute the Top 4 based on resume (even though that's not what the committee says they're doing). It's where you get to 5-10 - Michigan, Florida, Oklahoma, Ohio State - where it's much less clear and the committee is falling back on various biases IMO.

Okay. I wanted to make sure I understand your position.

Anyone else think Alabama and Clemson in the top four is a fraud? I don't.

 

[Observer11]

Okay. I wanted to make sure I understand your position.

Anyone else think Alabama and Clemson in the top four is a fraud? I don't.

There's a lot of stupid people in this world. I"m sure a noted researcher on this forum could craft a persuasive thesis on why Bama and Clemson don't belong.

 

[Flatlandcoug]

You're welcome... but sadly for you all you'll have to wait until next year... sorry

Question is, will you have a 5th year transfer QB to save you again? That's gonna be a tough thing to repeat every year, don't ya think?

As for UW... well you know what our situation looks like.

Like I said....the good news is that we won't see you after January 1st. You'll be in your double wide in Kent stroking your picture of Don James and mumbling about 1991.

 

[kougkurt]

Like I said....the good news is that we won't see you after January 1st. You'll be in your double wide in Kent stroking your picture of Don James and mumbling about 1991.

Double wide.

 

[extermin8r]

The Husky program is second rate to what? Alabama? Ohio St.? Clemson? Georgia? Shit, I'll take that. We're in the same boat as Michigan, Penn St. Oklahoma, Notre Dame, USC, LSU... which is great in my eyes. It's certainly not second rate to WSU - I hope that's not what you were inferring.

And no. I'd take a 10-3 Washington who won the AC, played a non-co game @Auburn, won the North, won the Pac 12 Championship and is going to the Rose Bowl over a 10-2 WSU team who played literal garbage in the non-co and is going to a mediocre bowl because it thank you very much.

Ok cornball I had to sign in for the first time in years thanks to this typical UW arrogance. Please tell me, on what metric(s), ANY metrics, that makes you think UW is in the same boat as ANY of the schools you mentioned. I'm truly curious. You can start on Winsipedia and do some comparisons, if actual data is part of your reasoning.

 

[Fab5Coug]

It is a cool story.

The reason UW got into the playoff is because they beat teams by 28 or more points 7 times. Included in those wins were a then ranked #7 Stanford and #9 ranked Colorado in the P-12 Championship and a #23 ranked WSU. Your wins don't stack up.

The Huskies had a "cupcake" schedule just like WSU... except they actually scheduled a Big-10 opponent for a home and away... not our fault they were trash. And all our non-co games were over by half-time... can't say that about the Coug games.

The Huskies only loss was to a #20 ranked USC team who won the Rose Bowl. Your loss was to a USC team that finished 5-7.

The resumes don't stack up... you would have needed to have blown out the Huskies to have had any say... which we all know wasn't going happen.

Was someone comparing 2018 WSU to 2016 UW?

 

[chugspig]

You're welcome... but sadly for you all you'll have to wait until next year... sorry

Question is, will you have a 5th year transfer QB to save you again? That's gonna be a tough thing to repeat every year, don't ya think?

As for UW... well you know what our situation looks like.

I don’t disagree with anything you’ve said in this thread. I do think WSU is being very undervalued next year though. 19/22 starters return, add in an All American DT, like Greg Gaines- Vita Vea level of player, the best juco safety in the nation, and you’re looking at the same team. All skill players return. Basically have to find someone who is decent at the qb spot, with 2 solid 4 star qbs on the roster, and maybe another transfers were not bad off.

UW on the other hand loses an NFL secondary 2/4 forsure, 3/4 are nfl ready, and the youngest one is the overall best CB in CFB. their best linebacker, best D lineman, best rb, 4 year qb, and highest quality olinemen. Maybe you fully reload but that is a brutal amount of attrition and talent loss.

 

[dgibbons]

I don’t disagree with anything you’ve said in this thread. I do think WSU is being very undervalued next year though. 19/22 starters return, add in an All American DT, like Greg Gaines- Vita Vea level of player, the best juco safety in the nation, and you’re looking at the same team. All skill players return. Basically have to find someone who is decent at the qb spot, with 2 solid 4 star qbs on the roster, and maybe another transfers were not bad off.

UW on the other hand loses an NFL secondary 2/4 forsure, 3/4 are nfl ready, and the youngest one is the overall best CB in CFB. their best linebacker, best D lineman, best rb, 4 year qb, and highest quality olinemen. Maybe you fully reload but that is a brutal amount of attrition and talent loss.

We're losing more guys than that. On offense, Minshew, Dillard and Sweet (who is listed as the starter). On defense, Tago, Comfort, Pelluer, Dale, Begg, Molton, and if you want to count Harper as starter him too.

 

[CognitiveDissonance]

Was someone comparing 2018 WSU to 2016 UW?

Not exactly. But someone was saying that the Cougs can only make the playoff if they run the table and only make the NY6 if they finish 11-1 because of the perception of the Pac-12.

I'll assume the same applies to UW (maybe you guys don't think it will)... and I believe it did in 2016. The Huskies truly had THE resume to get to the playoff that year given their blowout performances over highly ranked Pac 12 squads.

I'm saying that the Huskies overcame the perception of the Pac 12 with their performance that year.

The Cougars would need to do the same in the Pac 12's current state to earn respect and consideration for the playoff and NY6. But they didn't... not for either in my eyes. When all was said and done the Cougars didn't have many impressive wins... the Ducks turned out to be pretty average with 4 conference losses, Utah lost to UW twice which hurt the perception of your close win at home, Stanford was only a little above average at 8-4, and you were pummeled at home to UW. There's just not the resume there to think you should be considered for a major bowl... if you wanted that, you needed to look better against UW and lets face it, yeah there was snow, but the Cougs looked terrible.

And this is in no way me saying that the Huskies had a "better" resume. I think both team's resumes are about equal... but I don't think we would have deserved a NY6 bowl given how our year unfolded either. We're in the Rose Bowl because we won the Pac 12, which is cool... but not necessarily because we were world beaters getting there. And I'm fine with that because we won the games we needed to get what happens when you win the conference.

 

[PINGDUDE4]

Woah, testy, testy.

Yeah, the Auburn loss doesn't look great now. And I would say that if the Huskies had lost 1 less game in conference, but failed to beat the Cougars, we should not/would not be considered for a NY6 bowl game... you know, kind of like the situation the Cougars are in? Difference is, we played Auburn in Atlanta and that garnered respect.

The Husky program is second rate to what? Alabama? Ohio St.? Clemson? Georgia? Shit, I'll take that. We're in the same boat as Michigan, Penn St. Oklahoma, Notre Dame, USC, LSU... which is great in my eyes. It's certainly not second rate to WSU - I hope that's not what you were inferring.

And no. I'd take a 10-3 Washington who won the AC, played a non-co game @Auburn, won the North, won the Pac 12 Championship and is going to the Rose Bowl over a 10-2 WSU team who played literal garbage in the non-co and is going to a mediocre bowl because it thank you very much.

" Difference is, we played Auburn in Atlanta and that garnered respect."

You are a laugh a minute. Exactly what kind of respect was "garnered" losing to a 7-5 team that finished 5th place in their division ? If anything that loss probably hurt the National perspective of the P12 more than anything else this year.

Congrats on winning the conference enjoy that, and quit making up stupid crap to fit some narrative that you are crafting in your mind.

And while on the subject explain how UW's non conference schedule is a real "resume builder" next season. ESPN probably already has the cupcake jokes cued up.

 

[chugspig]

We're losing more guys than that. On offense, Minshew, Dillard and Sweet (who is listed as the starter). On defense, Tago, Comfort, Pelluer, Dale, Begg, Molton, and if you want to count Harper as starter him too.

Okay, Harper started 3 games? Comfort is being replaced by an all American. Molton? A 7 year old could do better. Begg and Dale and Pelleur were all good.

Offensively minshew and Dillard are losses. I like Kyle sweet but we have 8 receivers more talented. Overall we have to replace a middle backer, a qb, and a left tackle. Dale will be replaced by Djibril likely, or the juco safety. Not easy but not near the attrition of other schools. We return almost everyone of note.

 

[How_did_this_happen?]

I don’t disagree with anything you’ve said in this thread. I do think WSU is being very undervalued next year though. 19/22 starters return, add in an All American DT, like Greg Gaines- Vita Vea level of player, the best juco safety in the nation, and you’re looking at the same team. All skill players return. Basically have to find someone who is decent at the qb spot, with 2 solid 4 star qbs on the roster, and maybe another transfers were not bad off.

UW on the other hand loses an NFL secondary 2/4 forsure, 3/4 are nfl ready, and the youngest one is the overall best CB in CFB. their best linebacker, best D lineman, best rb, 4 year qb, and highest quality olinemen. Maybe you fully reload but that is a brutal amount of attrition and talent loss.

UW is 4 deep with NFL talent.

 

[How_did_this_happen?]

When was the last time a Pac12 team defeated a top 10 powerhouse? Who was it and who did they defeat? I can't recall when this happened last.

 

[Fab5Coug]

Not exactly. But someone was saying that the Cougs can only make the playoff if they run the table and only make the NY6 if they finish 11-1 because of the perception of the Pac-12.

I'll assume the same applies to UW (maybe you guys don't think it will)... and I believe it did in 2016. The Huskies truly had THE resume to get to the playoff that year given their blowout performances over highly ranked Pac 12 squads.

I'm saying that the Huskies overcame the perception of the Pac 12 with their performance that year.

The Cougars would need to do the same in the Pac 12's current state to earn respect and consideration for the playoff and NY6. But they didn't... not for either in my eyes. When all was said and done the Cougars didn't have many impressive wins... the Ducks turned out to be pretty average with 4 conference losses, Utah lost to UW twice which hurt the perception of your close win at home, Stanford was only a little above average at 8-4, and you were pummeled at home to UW. There's just not the resume there to think you should be considered for a major bowl... if you wanted that, you needed to look better against UW and lets face it, yeah there was snow, but the Cougs looked terrible.

And this is in no way me saying that the Huskies had a "better" resume. I think both team's resumes are about equal... but I don't think we would have deserved a NY6 bowl given how our year unfolded either. We're in the Rose Bowl because we won the Pac 12, which is cool... but not necessarily because we were world beaters getting there. And I'm fine with that because we won the games we needed to get what happens when you win the conference.

The perception of WSU is quite a bit different than UW.

And 2016 was a very different year nationally than 2018.

 

[CougPatrol]

I don’t want any bodybag games, but if we get invited to play in the occasional neutral field kickoff classic against a P5 giant, I’d be ok with it.

Traveling to Houston next season in week 3 isn’t ideal. If you’re going to make that trip, do it week 1 or 2, not the week before the P12 opener.

 

[CognitiveDissonance]

I don’t disagree with anything you’ve said in this thread. I do think WSU is being very undervalued next year though. 19/22 starters return, add in an All American DT, like Greg Gaines- Vita Vea level of player, the best juco safety in the nation, and you’re looking at the same team. All skill players return. Basically have to find someone who is decent at the qb spot, with 2 solid 4 star qbs on the roster, and maybe another transfers were not bad off.

UW on the other hand loses an NFL secondary 2/4 forsure, 3/4 are nfl ready, and the youngest one is the overall best CB in CFB. their best linebacker, best D lineman, best rb, 4 year qb, and highest quality olinemen. Maybe you fully reload but that is a brutal amount of attrition and talent loss.

Yeah I can see that. But we've also done a pretty good job replacing NFL level talent in the past in Peters, Baker, King, Jones and Vea.

The odd part about all those guys I mentioned? Only one of them, Baker, was a 4 star coming out of high school... says a lot about our ability to develop defensive talent given that all of those guys were first or second round picks.

Of the NFL talent on our D leaving this year: Murphy, Miller, BBK, Gaines, Rapp... once again, only one of those guys was a 4 star recruit... Murphy. I'm not sure if Rapp and Murphy are leaving... seems likely, but who knows? Maybe they stick around for another shot at a playoff with Eason coming in to play QB?

Keith Taylor actually played better than Miller in his absence, and we have Kyler Gordon + Julius Irvin who are next in line to play corner and safety who are immensely talented. Not to mention that we are the current favorite to land Kelly Ringo at corner for 2020 who will come in a start right away.

At linebacker we have Brandon Wellington who many figure is next in line to have a BBK like senior year, not to mention returning DJ Beavers... we'll get to see who emerges from Myles Rice, Jackson Sirmon and Ariel Ngata. I tell ya what though, it hurt losing Kaho to Bama... he would have been huge for this D.

On the defensive line we're really only replacing tackles. Yeah Gaines is a great player... but Onwuzurike really came on this year, Joe Tryon is going to be a problem as a pass rusher and Benning is great as well. The nice thing is we've recruited DT's better than any position of late... Tuli Letuligasenoa, Jacob Bandes and Faatui Tuitele are all extremely talented top 60 overall 4-star recruits.

The real question mark is going to be replacing Myles Gaskin. Salvon Ahmed is a great back, no question, but he's a speedster... doesn't have the same skillset as Gaskin when it comes to breaking tackles. It's actually a position I'm surprised we haven't recruited better given how much we run the ball. I'm not a fan of Sean McGrew... Kamari Pleasant is decent... but I'm a bit worried. Maybe 4-star Cameron Davis will come in and surprise?

At WR you can expect a nice jump in talent and productivity. We return everyone and you should see Marquis Spiker and Austin Osbourne get their chances - both are freakin studs.

Tight end is our most complete returning position.

On the O-line we lose McGary but return everyone else... we'll simply move Jared Hilbers to right tackle... he played quite well in Adams' absence.

And finally, no more limped arm Browning... we'll have Jacob Eason running the offense... and I cannot wait.

 

[CognitiveDissonance]

The perception of WSU is quite a bit different than UW.

And 2016 was a very different year nationally than 2018.

Yeah I kind of agree. Then again, I don't.

Had the Huskies won their big games by only a handful points in 2016 I bet you we'd have missed the playoff at 11-1. Lets say we beat #7 Stanford by like 7 points (instead of 38), #9 Colorado by like 10 (instead of 31) and #23 WSU by like 3 (instead of 28)... and if we had lost to a 5-7 USC instead of a USC that won the Rose Bowl... I bet we're left out of the playoff and would have gotten a NY6. It was controversial that we were in it to begin with... and it was all based on the perception of a weak Pac 12. Maybe stronger then than it is now... but still considered weak.

WSU needed to play UW close in the Apple Cup to get a NY6 bid... instead, those who tuned in watch you guys get totally out muscled. If anyone watched the last 9 minutes of the football game they'd have left thinking that the Cougars were a fluke at 10-1 given how the Huskies ran the ball down their throats. I'm sorry to say that.

I believe a NY6 will never be in the cards until you prove you can beat a good UW team when it means something. That will change your perception.

 

[Flatlandcoug]

I don’t want any bodybag games, but if we get invited to play in the occasional neutral field kickoff classic against a P5 giant, I’d be ok with it.

Traveling to Houston next season in week 3 isn’t ideal. If you’re going to make that trip, do it week 1 or 2, not the week before the P12 opener.

Disagree about opening with a tough opponent. I would prefer to play Houston in week 3 and get the softest, pillowest, highest topped frosted cupcake possible in week 1. Do you really want to break in your new quarterback on the road against a team that's not bad and has something to prove, or do you want to give him a game where he can build up his confidence?

Now, let's jump ahead a few years. Let's say that Cam Cooper ends up being a ginormous stud and has a great season in 2019. It might be a good idea to see if we could shuffle our 2021 schedule around to get a higher profile game for us to be in. We do play at Wisconsin in 2022, so that actually represents a good opportunity for our team. Of course, Cooper may end up not being that great and we might have a different guy doing their thing.

 

[BiggsCoug]

You're welcome... but sadly for you all you'll have to wait until next year... sorry

Question is, will you have a 5th year transfer QB to save you again? That's gonna be a tough thing to repeat every year, don't ya think?

As for UW... well you know what our situation looks like.

If Jake Browning was your best QB, I wouldn't be crowing about the kids that couldnt beat him out.

And who cares if its a 5th year qb? With a passing offense and Leach having a resume of success with 1 year starters, I actually think 5th yeae qbs would work out more often than not.

 

[Glad Cougar]

Yeah I kind of agree. Then again, I don't.

Had the Huskies won their big games by only a handful points in 2016 I bet you we'd have missed the playoff at 11-1. Lets say we beat #7 Stanford by like 7 points (instead of 38), #9 Colorado by like 10 (instead of 31) and #23 WSU by like 3 (instead of 28)... and if we had lost to a 5-7 USC instead of a USC that won the Rose Bowl... I bet we're left out of the playoff and would have gotten a NY6. It was controversial that we were in it to begin with... and it was all based on the perception of a weak Pac 12. Maybe stronger then than it is now... but still considered weak.

WSU needed to play UW close in the Apple Cup to get a NY6 bid... instead, those who tuned in watch you guys get totally out muscled. If anyone watched the last 9 minutes of the football game they'd have left thinking that the Cougars were a fluke at 10-1 given how the Huskies ran the ball down their throats. I'm sorry to say that.

I believe a NY6 will never be in the cards until you prove you can beat a good UW team when it means something. That will change your perception.

I"m not one to want to make excuses, and it was clear to me that UW was the better team in this year's AC but not over the course of the entire season, IMO. I also admit the Cougars had control over their own destiny and needed to win that rivalry game. But instead of believing WSU was a fluke going into the Apple Cup, it may be simply a matchup that doesn't work in WSU's favor the past few years. UW has lost 13 of the last 15 games vs. UO. Many of those years, the Ducks were simply much better. But how do you explain this year's loss in Eugene? The Huskies simply didn't play very well in one game, the same way the Cougars didn't play well in the AC. And despite the subjective narrative that the UW-WSU game wasn't close, the Cougars were within a TD of going ahead in the 4th quarter. Early in the final quarter, it was still anyone's ball game.

Glad Cougar