The point I was really trying to get across with the Alaskan Husky is that they don't need/want a standard. The breeders are continuously innovating- adding new breeds to the mix to see what makes a faster, sharper, smarter animal, with greater endurance than before. Then know internally exactly what they're working for, and the dog's suitability for racing is PROVEN as soon as the animal is old enough to get into a harness and start running. Look on any one team of Alaskan Huskies, and the dogs vary widely in terms of looks. The breeders aren't after a "look." They are *purely* after performance- and that in and of itself is a lot harder to write a standard for.
My point is the breeders DON'T and WON'T EVER have a clear idea of what the puppies are going to look like. Because for one, they aren't just simple F1 crosses, and 2 they don't *care* what they look like- it's not important for their job.
I'll agree that I've seen a fair number of Cocker-Poodle mixes that look vaguely similar- but it's still not the same way you'll see in any one breed. And for all the Cocker-Poodle mixes that DO look like one another, I've seen tons and tons of "Labradoodles," and "Goldendoodles" that don't resemble their own littermates, let alone other similar crosses. The standards written for them are laughable- they're so vague it's almost funny, and yet they HAVE to be, to encompass such a wide range of animals.