| Its funny that all of Oregon wins have an asterix with you, but regardless of how UCLA wins or who its against you don't point that out at all.
The Stanford argument does not hold water because 1. Oregon beat Stanford and 2. Stanford beat UCLA and 3. Oregon beat UCLA.
I guess i don't understand your logic. Do "ugly" games not count all of the sudden? I don't see an "ugly game" column anywhere, its WIN and LOSS. Thats it...no domination column, no almost lost column, no looked great winning column, no stunk like a pig column, no looked good in losing column, no dominated the stats but lost column...you get the point.
Just so you know i'm not getting a big head about this Duck team. I'm ready for the let down. Be it tonight (down by 15 last i checked) or in the tourney. I think they CAN do great things, "Ernie Kent ball" is just not designed to win it all. But you talk like we should just end the season now and give UCLA the trophy.
And what do these kids on UCLA have to do with history? Is Bill Walton gonna come out of the rafters and help em out? They went to the final game last year and lost. What kind of history is that? Finishing 2nd place i guess...not sure how thats gonna help them out this year.  |