From: jjungbau@yoda.eecs.wsu.edu (Jim Jungbauer)
Subject: Re: WOOF GODS STRIKES AGAIN! (was Re: WSU 42 UW 23)
Organization: Washington State University, Pullman    
Distribution: usa
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 92 23:27:25 GMT

In article <dkH=2w@engin.umich.edu> chyang@westquad.engin.umich.edu (Chung Hsiung Yang) writes:

>	Ok.  Given the weather condition, WSU has the definite advantage
>with the way their teams is and game plan is structured.  There is no
>arguemnent.  UW could not have won anyway.  The snow COMPLETELY neutralized
>the speed of Washington's defense and offense.  The arguement of bulk vs
>speed comes into play here. The defensive line of the Huskies are big but
>not as big as the offensive line and they were in effective without traction
>on the ground.  

Can't you guys give WSU any credit for winning this game???!!!  Well, I won't
generalize too much... Behzad did make an intelligent post, giving appropriate
credit to WSU for superior play, he didn't cry about the weather, he was very
gracious in defeat, and is looking forward to the Rose Bowl (as am I).  But
just when I'm starting to feel good about people making good intelligent
posts, I have to read this...

You make it sound as if the snow affected only UW.  I've got news for you,
WSU's defense is built very much around speed as well... guys like Childs
and Maclanahan (sp?) use their speed to move up and down the line extremely
well, and they are the heart of that defense.  You mention all of the  
problems that the (lack of) traction gave the Huskies... am I mistaken, or
didn't *both* teams have to play on that field yesterday?  And how much
practice time had the Cougars had in the snow... NONE, just like the Huskies.
Bledsoe managed a *great* day in those conditions.  Face it, the Cougs just
got the job done; the Huskies didn't.  Quit whining about the weather, please.


>	BTW, this is the kind of day that if MIAMI had played WSU, they will
>have been blown out as well.  Miami's team structure is similar to the Huskies,
>which relies on speed.  The game would not even be close.  Too bad they played
>in a dome. 
>	Not to take away Bledsloes talent he is very good.  But he is playing
>against a defensive set that is basically useless in a weather like that. 
>	Like I said, the Woof God Stuck and it snowed that game.  If it was
>on dry ground, the story will be very different.  
>	I don't buy the arguement of talent level ....  etc.  I don't care how
>good the WSU offense is.  The weather was the primary factor in determine the
>outcome.  Now all you WAZZU fans have to hope for is that it snows everytime
>Apple cup come around.

Do you know how pathetic your argument sounds?  Let me see if I've got this
right... basically, the *only* reason we won the game was the weather, and the
*only* reason the Huskies were unable to do anything was the weather (couldn't
have had anything to do with our defense).  So what's the Huskies' excuse for
the Arizona loss... sun got in their eyes all day so they couldn't throw the
ball effectively?  Turf conditions were too poor so they couldn't run very
well?  Isn't is possible that another team actually *outplayed* the Huskies?
Whether you want to admit it or not, it's happened twice this year... against
UA and WSU... both teams won, and both deserved it, period.


Jim
-- 
Jim Jungbauer                 |  Go Vikings, Northstars, Cougars!
jjungbau@yoda.eecs.wsu.edu    | 
EECS Department               |  "Nice move by Bellows... big drive... SCORES!"
Washington State University   |     -- Mike Emrick, 1991 Norris Division Finals
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.college