JDDucky wrote: Tomorrow, in the morning, you will be younger. You will be the youngest team in the state. You will be younger than the Seattle Seahawks. You will have some new 17 year olds, some new 18 year olds and maybe even a few 19 year olds, but Sark can once again, be very confident, that YOU ARE YOUNG. And btw...tomorrow you seal up another "Recruiting National Championship." You'll be about 3-6 spots ahead of us, but yes, you can again, reach the impossible dream.

dubsup1234 wrote: If we switched coaches and UO had Sark and UW had Chip, how much would the teams records last year have changed? Also please explain your answer.

This will tell everybody a lot about you and your analyzation skills.

---------------------------------------------
--- cheswick wrote:


<blockquote dir="ltr"><strong>JDDucky wrote:</strong> Tomorrow, in the morning, you will be younger. You will be the youngest team in the state. You will be younger than the Seattle Seahawks. You will have some new 17 year olds, some new 18 year olds and maybe even a few 19 year olds, but Sark can once again, be very confident, that YOU ARE YOUNG. And btw...tomorrow you seal up another "Recruiting National Championship." You'll be about 3-6 spots ahead of us, but yes, you can again, reach the impossible dream.</blockquote><span style="color: #008000; font-size: large;"><em>They are close once again to acheiving the offeseason national championship...they will be young...no matter other teams MAY be younger, ignore that man behind the curtain!</em></span>

<span style="color: #008000; font-size: large;"><em>the huskies ARE young! they are coached by the chief of Queef, the master of mediocre, the fearless leader of the legends in their own minds!...Bark for sark!</em></span>

---------------------------------------------

dubsup1234 wrote: If we switched coaches and UO had Sark and UW had Chip, how much would the teams records last year have changed? Also please explain your answer.

This will tell everybody a lot about you and your analyzation skills.

dubsup1234 wrote: We suck so bad that we beat Stanford, the best team in the PAC. The Stanford you lost to and got physically beat up by. We don't measure ourselves against Oregon, like Oregon does for us. We measure ourselves against the best team in the PAC, which is Stanford, who we beat.

I would love another Bellotti at UO that would take you guys back to mediocrity. Bellotti=Helfrich.

We have a better recruiting class, which contributes to better depth. The difference between the two teams last year was depth, not coaching (Sark had NFL offers). Now we are slowly catching up.

Like I said, put Sark in Oregon and Chip at UW and the outcomes would not change. The problem is depth and talent, not coaching at UW. That is getting fixed. The difference between Sark and Chip is that, Sark's dream job is UW and Chip's dream was never Oregon. That is why he left you at the alter, which Sark would never do to us.

Also if we have sucked for 25 years, how come we have a Natty in that period and a Rose Bowl in this century. More Natty's than you in your history and equal amount of Rosé Bowl's in this century. I am happy for your last 10 years, but you will never have the tradition UW has, in having the 2nd most Rose Bowls in PAC history and being the 2nd best program in the PAC historically.

dubsup1234 wrote: knowing you'll return to mediocrity, 

dubsup1234 wrote: Isn't the past 9 years the past? So I guess your living in the past just like UW fans. Hahahahahahaha.

So with your insults should I assume you are not mature enough to conduct a discussion? It's fine, I understand how you must feel with your hero Chip leaving and knowing you are headed to mediocrity.

Whose your daddy? Udubbbbbbbb... Hahahahahahaha

dubsup1234 wrote: Hahaha. Is that why we won the Rose Bowl in 2001?