THE PAC 12 THREAD v.5

[Olyduck]

I would be willing to bet that 95% off all 10 win seasons in college football history have come since the BCS era.

maybe so but even if you reduce the bar to say 8 or 9 because of number of games played prior to the BCS era it still doesn't happen often where teams were streaking at those levels either.

 

[Olyduck]

And this point has been debunked many times already.

Sure, UW didn't run the same mini streak during any of their prior runs (plural, not singular). UW also didn't have the luxury of USC on sanctions and decimated program during them. They had road blocks beyond a nerd school with a semi challenging running game to impede their progress. UW picked a totally fucky time to hit the basement and didn't have the same opportunity the ducks did.

The other schools you mention all have blue blood or solid rivals that at least get in the way here and there. The ducks were almost entirely the product of circumstances of the perfect storm with that particular streak.

The party is over. The powers are back in the saddle again. No more easy peasy runs to the top for the ducks. You now have Stanford, UW, AND USC as well as the odd middle tier team that might bite you. That's a far cry from that same path a few short years ago.

Last I checked when USC was down there were 8 other schools that were in the league then 10 and none of them did what Oregon did til Stanford tried (run of 4 seasons with 10+ wins)
and just because there wasn't a consistent team doesn't mean there weren't still good teams from year to year.

 

[WizardHawk]

Last I checked when USC was down there were 8 other schools that were in the league then 10 and none of them did what Oregon did til Stanford tried (run of 4 seasons with 10+ wins)
and just because there wasn't a consistent team doesn't mean there weren't still good teams from year to year.

Stanford was the only very high level threat during the majority of that run. Period. No other team in the Pac had all of the parts in place to derail the ducks outside of Shaw's team. Didn't say the ducks couldn't have lost to other Pac teams, but that's not the same thing as a race to the conf title.

Remember that until we added Colorado/Utah it was a true race against EVERYONE, not just half the conf. Being able to miss playing some Pac teams at all and only really worrying about 5 of them to get to a one game winner takes all is a very different thing than the rest of that history you are banging on about. That changed everything.

That and we haven't had 12 game seasons for that long either. It was harder to reach 10+ when there were only 10 or 11 regular season games.

So your little feat is fraught with issues with the way you are trying to use it.

 

[trojanfan12]

Oregon's "little run" of 7 seasons with 10+ wins is little because they had never been a traditionally good team
but USC's only run of 7 seasons with 10+ wins in a row is not called little because they have had good teams in the past.

Yes. Sooner or later, you Ducks fan will learn that history actually matters in college football.

 

[trojanfan12]

Oregon in the 2000s were up then down then up then down then back up for a number of years.

You just proved what everyone says about Ducks fans to be correct.

 

[WizardHawk]

College football went to a 12 game regular season schedule in 2006. 11 years ago.
Ducks 7 year lil run started in 2008. You know, after the time they added another game to the regular season.

First 3 of them were in the old format Pac10. Two of those were exactly 10 wins. You know, when you played every single team every year.

The last 4 were in the 12 game Pac12 era. Something that has only existed for a total of 6 seasons now.

But let's go ahead and compare that unique time of history to every other era throughout time and use 10 wins as our barometer for success. A mark that is entirely different to reach now than it was even just 7 years ago, more or less farther back.

 

[Olyduck]

You just proved what everyone says about Ducks fans to be correct.

and that is?
you asked about up and down. Oregon hasn't had much up and down before that. should I have gone to 1915 7-2,7-0-1, 4-3, 4-2, 5-2, 3-2-1, 5-1-3, 6-1-1, 3-4-1, 4-3-2, 1-5-1, 2-4-1, 2-4-1, 9-2, 7-3, 7-2, 6-2-2, 9-1, 6-4, 6-3?
is that a good 20 year stretch to show some up and down that is totally significant to what happened from 2009 to now?

 

[Olyduck]

College football went to a 12 game regular season schedule in 2006. 11 years ago.
Ducks 7 year lil run started in 2008. You know, after the time they added another game to the regular season.

First 3 of them were in the old format Pac10. Two of those were exactly 10 wins. You know, when you played every single team every year.

The last 4 were in the 12 game Pac12 era. Something that has only existed for a total of 6 seasons now.

But let's go ahead and compare that unique time of history to every other era throughout time and use 10 wins as our barometer for success. A mark that is entirely different to reach now than it was even just 7 years ago, more or less farther back.

the 12 game regular season 11 years ago only added 1 game. so 11 regular season and a bowl was still a significant number of games as far back as the 60s and 70s

so then what would be a fair comparison for you? 9 wins 8 wins? look back at the same teams and there aren't significant streaks of those seasons either

 

[Olyduck]

Yes. Sooner or later, you Ducks fan will learn that history actually matters in college football.

having history is nice but most kids these days with their dab, whip and nay nay, fidget spinners, water bottle flips, memes, and going viral don't care about a national championship from 1952. they don't care about John David Crow winning the Heisman in 1957. Oregon has history. It just doesn't have as many pages as some others but it doesn't mean it doesn't exist. But tell a kid well Dan Fouts and Ahmad Rashad played at Oregon. half will ask who and the other half just wont care.

 

[WizardHawk]

the 12 game regular season 11 years ago only added 1 game. so 11 regular season and a bowl was still a significant number of games as far back as the 60s and 70s

so then what would be a fair comparison for you? 9 wins 8 wins? look back at the same teams and there aren't significant streaks of those seasons either

I was pointing out different eras produce different results. That's a fact. Not just the added game, but also the very very different scheduling now in the Pac12 era. Remember it also added a CCG which is another on top of the 11+bowl you referenced prior to 2007. Hell, they played 15 games total in '14. How many teams in the Pac have ever played 15 games in one season?

Then add in that Stanford was the lone opposition during that stretch that really could derail them and it was, as many have pointed out, the perfect storm.

It was a nice little run while it lasted though and there are lots of nice youtubes of it all to look back on so enjoy it.

 

[trojanfan12]

and that is?

That they have no clue about football outside of the Ducks little run and think that was when football started.

 

[trojanfan12]

having history is nice but most kids these days with their dab, whip and nay nay, fidget spinners, water bottle flips, memes, and going viral don't care about a national championship from 1952. they don't care about John David Crow winning the Heisman in 1957. Oregon has history. It just doesn't have as many pages as some others but it doesn't mean it doesn't exist. But tell a kid well Dan Fouts and Ahmad Rashad played at Oregon. half will ask who and the other half just wont care.

Actually, USC's history has a lot to do with why they get the players they do. It's the history of winning and of putting guys in the NFL.

They may not care much about the individual players that USC has had and probably couldn't name many. But they care very much about the history of championships, Heisman's and NFL players.

 

[TheReal_NU]

the 12 game regular season 11 years ago only added 1 game. so 11 regular season and a bowl was still a significant number of games as far back as the 60s and 70s

so then what would be a fair comparison for you? 9 wins 8 wins? look back at the same teams and there aren't significant streaks of those seasons either

Nebraska won at least 9 games/year from 1969 - 2001.

edit: Or am I not allowed to play?

 

[Olyduck]

That they have no clue about football outside of the Ducks little run and think that was when football started.

really? and while that maybe true for some like OD. Im not really the avg Oregon fan or the avg college football fan for that matter.

 

[Olyduck]

Nebraska won at least 9 games/year from 1969 - 2001.

edit: Or am I not allowed to play?

and then Solich came along...

 

[TheReal_NU]

and then Solich came along...

Solich won 9 or more in 5 of 6 years. Was 59-19 so only won 75% of his games.

The correct answer is Steve Pederson came along as the AD and hired that fucknut from the Oakland Raders.

edit: Or do I sound bitter?

 

[Olyduck]

Solich won 9 or more in 5 of 6 years. Was 59-19 so only won 75% of his games.

The correct answer is Steve Pederson came along as the AD and hired that fucknut from the Oakland Raders.

edit: Or do I sound bitter?

yeah but still had that dip to 7 to break the streak. Neb hasn't been the same since.
although Pelini was there with 9 or more each season and they fired him for it? Whats up with that?

 

[TheReal_NU]

yeah but still had that dip to 7 to break the streak. Neb hasn't been the same since.
although Pelini was there with 9 or more each season and they fired him for it? Whats up with that?

He was an asshole.
To everyone. Fans, press, officials.
So we went 180 degrees and hired that young up and comer from Oregon State. He's a nice guy.


Blowout losses were the undoing though. 9-4 or 10-3 was OK, but losing 2 games a year by 40 fucking points on national TV was just the last straw.

 

[Olyduck]

He was an asshole.
To everyone. Fans, press, officials.
So we went 180 degrees and hired that young up and comer from Oregon State. He's a nice guy.


Blowout losses were the undoing though. 9-4 or 10-3 was OK, but losing 2 games a year by 40 fucking points on national TV was just the last straw.

bro that young up and comer has been a head coach since 1987 and is 63
Pelini is 49

 

[TheReal_NU]

bro that young up and comer has been a head coach since 1987 and is 63
Pelini is 49

Sarcasm font was apparently left off???
Clue one for me.
If I type something, it is almost always in the sarcasm font.