Subtle changes in Ektard's Recruiting blog is building the mythos of Sark the Conqueror

bananasnblondes

Ran across some decent chit today

For those who don't remember, the Sark era Recruiting blog went something like this:

"Here's a bunch of highly-touted, 5-star prospects who love this staff and are UW leans."
-Reaction: "Wow, Sark and co. are really hitting the trail. This will be an amazing class!!!"

Reality: None of those highly-touted, 5-star guys pick UW; Sark settle s for leftovers.
-Reaction: "Scott, you said we were doing really well for this guy, what happened? He said we were his 5th choice."
"Well, 5th place is pretty good. That means we were doing really well. Just not as good as the other 4 teams"
(poof)

Now here's the new-style Recruiting blog under Petersen:
"Here's a bunch of 2 and 3 star guys with offers from Colorado State. Now everyone remember that Coach Petersen doesn't care about athleticism, size, or any of that. He just wants OKGs. He doesn't things his own way and some people won't like it."
-Reaction: "WHAAAA?? No!! Sark would have had us loaded with talent already. Petersen better realize he's in the Pac-12 now. We were spoiled by Sark and his amazing recruiting skills. Say what you like about his coaching but the recruiting blogs sure are less fun to read without him at the helm. C'mon Sark left him a stacked 9 WIN TEAM. He should be doing better than this"

Reality: ????

Now at this point a few posters step forward and remind everyone that even though Scott's Recruiting blogs were filled with fantasy about Sark reeling in his mythical top 5 recruiting class, the reality was much different, and that CP has offered more 4 and 5 star players this year than Sark ever did (they're just not being highlighted on the recruiting blog). It was also pointed out that in his 5 years, Sark only brought in 1 4* linebacker (the focus of the blog was on linebackers) and he never made it into the school.

Anyways, that doesn't matter. Myles Jack, Reuben Foster, Eddie Vanderdoes. Getting to read about those guys and their love for UW in recruiting blogs is what made Sark such a great recruiter, and we can all yearn for those days to return.

-bananaboat

dnc

GC, BB

Swaye

I love having moles in the enemy camp lemon party.

ApostleofGrief

dnc said:

GC, BB

Can we stop using these hipster codes?

dnc

ApostleofGrief said:

dnc said:

GC, BB

Can we stop using these hipster codes?

FO, AOG

ApostleofGrief

OK, but if you deny being a hipster with these codes, that makes you a hipster according to APAG.

dnc

ApostleofGrief said:

OK, but if you deny being a hipster with these codes, that makes you a hipster according to APAG.

I never started using codes until using codes became cool, therefore not cool enough to be a hipster.

iryk, hth, lmb, gms, rbt, etc

ApostleofGrief

Nope. If you deny being a hipster you are one. APAG says so.

dnc

ApostleofGrief said:

Nope. If you deny being a hipster you are one. APAG says so.

He didn't say denying being a hipster means you are one, he just said that hipsters deny being hipsters. Some of you need to learn the difference.

ApostleofGrief

But you just denied being a hipster!

CuntWaffle

Mods?

Tequilla

Thanks for the update.

I had heard those rumors as well yesterday ... it made me El Oh El.

Let's be realistic about what Washington recruiting has always been all about. It's never about signing 25 guys that are all 4-star and better. That's just not the way things have been done. A great class is getting 10 4-star guys or better (which makes sense because that's roughly the Top 300 of recruits ... if you figure you're a Top 25 team and each Top 25 team gets no more than 10 4-star or better players on average, there's not a lot left over if you aren't in the Top 25). The way this program has always been built up is by getting "guys that want to be Huskies," players that have upside and are developed, guys with a chip on their shoulder out of SoCal because they think they are better than the guys that went to USC/UCLA, keeping the top talent in-state, and from time to time winning heads up recruiting battles with USC and UCLA.

The idiots out there like Ektard and Kim Jong Vino would like people to believe that the only way that Washington can be successful is to be full of steak and sizzle in recruiting. Bullshit. Petersen's produced more NFL caliber players at Boise during his tenure than has been produced at Washington during that time period (too lazy to look it up and confirm so fuck off if it's the other way around ... point being is that Boise shouldn't be producing as much talent as Washington).

Petersen's already landed 3 4-star kids in this class. I think you have to like our chances for landing Chico McClatcher and Henry Roberts (and really any kid that is coming out of Bellevue at this point as long as Petersen is in charge). That's 2 more 4-star kids. My guess is that Petersen ends up with somewhere in the 7-10 range by the end of this class for 4-star or better recruits.

List of 4-stars+ in Sark's tenure:

2009 = 0
2010 = 10 (includes Potoae, Kohler, Porter, Montana, Chris Young, and Cooper who either didn't contribute much, injured/medically retired, didn't make it into school, or transferred w/o making any significant contributions)
2011 = 5
2012 = 4
2013 = 8

Petersen in 2014 = 4 (in less than 2 months of recruiting)
Petersen in 2013 = 3 (work in progress)

As is usual when working with opinions from Ektard and KJV, the facts generally don't align with their opinions.

PostGameOrangeSlices

everyone with at least half of a brain left that place a long time ago.

HuskyJW

Remember Sark's staff got Shaq

CokeGreaterThanPepsi

Reality is that as long as it isn't a transition class ANY coach at Washington will pull a top 25 class probably 5 out of 6 years. As long as you are top 20-25 you are fine. The difference between a #10 class and a #25 class is nothing. I'll poast some actual facts later on recruiting to Warshington.

RoadDawg55

The talent Sark brought in was fine. It could have been better, but it wasn't bad either. Last year's team had good talent. His problem was discipline. He cared more about star QB's and skill position guys than lineman, LB's, and DB's.

Peterman will likely bring in much more balanced classes. The returning DB depth is unacceptable and is an example of Sark's lack of discipline. The OL depth next year will be the same. We might get lucky, and the groups might turn out okay, but we shouldn't be in those positions in the first place, and the reason why we are is Sark fucked up.

TTJ

ApostleofGrief said:

But you just denied being a hipster!

I've met dnc. Not a hipster.

ApostleofGrief

TTJ said:

ApostleofGrief said:

But you just denied being a hipster!

I've met dnc. Not a hipster.

You associate with dnc? Hipster! Unless you DENY IT?

CuntWaffle

TTJ said:

ApostleofGrief said:

But you just denied being a hipster!

I've met dnc. Not a hipster.

It's just AoG pressing very badly, don't take him too seriously.

ApostleofGrief

all right, all right, a little hipster McCarthyism never hurt anybody

Tequilla

Talking so much about hipsters longs me for discussions of a TBS variety ...

Swaye

AoG. PB. ET.

dnc

TTJ said:

ApostleofGrief said:

But you just denied being a hipster!

I've met dnc. Not a hipster.

Al Qaida's support never felt so good. Dirka dirka!

allpurpleallgold

TTJ said:

ApostleofGrief said:

But you just denied being a hipster!

I've met dnc. Not a hipster.

Well I'm jealous.

allpurpleallgold

ApostleofGrief said:

OK, but if you deny being a hipster with these codes, that makes you a hipster according to APAG.

Link?

CFetters_Nacho_Lover

Swaye said:

I love having moles in the enemy camp lemon party.

So you're saying we have friendly lemon parties?

Swaye

CFetters_Nacho_Lover said:

Swaye said:

I love having moles in the enemy camp lemon party.

So you're saying we have friendly lemon parties?

I don't know if they are friendly, but everyone makes the O face.

CFetters_Nacho_Lover

Swaye said:

CFetters_Nacho_Lover said:

Swaye said:

I love having moles in the enemy camp lemon party.

So you're saying we have friendly lemon parties?

I don't know if they are friendly, but everyone makes the O face.

Like this?



Or this?

dnc

CFetters_Nacho_Lover said:

Swaye said:

CFetters_Nacho_Lover said:

Swaye said:

I love having moles in the enemy camp lemon party.

So you're saying we have friendly lemon parties?

I don't know if they are friendly, but everyone makes the O face.

Like this?



Or this?

BRB