More swooning for Pete

chrisvashon

Watching ESPN's college football primer, which features interviews with college coaches. Peterson was asked how he copes with losing.

"Haven't figured it out. And it's not something you get used to. Losses hurt more now than ever. It's painful. And it's not just 'big' games. They all hurt."

Can you imagine Sark's answer to that question? "Doesn't really bother me. The score isn't indicative of how good the teams are."

CuntWaffle

Sark would say some pussy shit like "As long as your team takes strides then losses can benefit your team in the long run."

puppylove_sugarsteel

"I just need 10 years". No joke, many posters on dickman said Sark needs 10 years, can you believe that shit? Yale and Fleenor among them. A head coach gets 5 years. Pete included...it might take that long to clean up Sark's mess.

Sark took over a better situation than Petersen. (Sark xidnt take over a true 0-12 team). He had a junior QB in Locker, proven runne r in Polk and good line and defense. Pete took over a mess at QB and a terribly thin dline, oline and dB situation depthwise. The starters are great....but not much after that have got reps..

SpoonieLuv

Don't forget Sarks 24 hour rule; as long as he's banging a hostess within 24 hours of a loss, he doesn't let it bother him.

Fire_Marshall_Bill

He needs his meds FRANNY!

puppylove_sugarsteel

Listen fuckers, Petersen wouldn't have went 5-7 with Locker and that crew in '09.There's a lot of similarities between that team and this squad.

Petersen has a great starting 22. The remaining roster is no better than UTAH's second unit. (as they haven't played down 1) Sark left Petersen a buttfucking mess not counting the starters. Pull your heads out and look.

CuntWaffle

puppylove_sugarsteel said:

Listen fuckers, Petersen wouldn't have went 5-7 with Locker and that crew in '09.There's a lot of similarities between that team and this squad.

Petersen has a great starting 22. The remaining roster is no better than UTAH's second unit. (as they haven't played down 1) Sark left Petersen a buttfucking mess not counting the starters. Pull your heads out and look.

So you are saying the cupboard is bare ya bearded cunt ya?

Gladstone

Yale never said Sark needed ten years.

Swaye

I bleat for Pete!

puppylove_sugarsteel

Gladstone said:

Yale never said Sark needed ten years.

Yes you did Yale. I got a timeout for pounding your flabby cunt over the issue.

RoadDawg55

puppylove_sugarsteel said:

"I just need 10 years". No joke, many posters on dickman said Sark needs 10 years, can you believe that shit? Yale and Fleenor among them. A head coach gets 5 years. Pete included...it might take that long to clean up Sark's mess.

Sark took over a better situation than Petersen. (Sark xidnt take over a true 0-12 team). He had a junior QB in Locker, proven runne r in Polk and good line and defense. Pete took over a mess at QB and a terribly thin dline, oline and dB situation depthwise. The starters are great....but not much after that have got reps..

Fuck me runnin' Puppy! Did your brother get ahold of your account again? Where is Cockus when you need him? You're better than that. The '09 team started either Darrion Jones or Talia Crichton at DE. Te'o Nesheim was good, Kikaha is better. Same with a sophomore Ta'Amu vs. a senior Shelton. Josh Gage was the first LB off the bench. The CB's were a true freshman Trufant, Quinton Richardson, and Adam Long. Nick Wood and Greg Christine started on the OL. Kelemete was the best OL even though he moved there during Spring Ball. Dwayne Washington was more proven than Polk was at the time. Polk got hurt in '08, and was terrible in the two or three games he did play.

The '09 team had some talent in places, but this year's team is way better, especially on the OL and DL. It's not even close. The depth is way better too. Their was no depth on the OL and DL in '09. There is now. Same with LB. The DB depth is young, but is also better.

IrishDawg22

puppylove_sugarsteel said:

Listen fuckers, Petersen wouldn't have went 5-7 with Locker and that crew in '09.There's a lot of similarities between that team and this squad.

Petersen has a great starting 22. The remaining roster is no better than UTAH's second unit. (as they haven't played down 1) Sark left Petersen a buttfucking mess not counting the starters. Pull your heads out and look.

This is why I love the bi-polar Puppy.

First statement is probably true. I think Coach Pete's game management would have turned around a couple of those close losses and got us to 7 or 8 wins.

But you are way off base if you think the roster in 09' is deeper than now. Across the board we are better off at every single position (depth wise) and it is not even close. The 09' probably had more top end talent at certain positions, but the depth was a joke. There were a lot of guys in the program that should have been applying their craft in Ellensburg.

chuck

Puppy has matched his previous best in senility and stupidity on this thread. Nothing shocking though.

chuck

puppylove_sugarsteel said:

Gladstone said:

Yale never said Sark needed ten years.

Yes you did Yale. I got a timeout for pounding your flabby cunt over the issue.

No, he didn't. You got a timeout for doing what you always did there, and always do here. You fail miserably in reading comprehension and flail around in a blind, drunken rage...staggering and swinging this way and that until you eventually hit the floor and pass out in a puddle of your own vomit.

sarktastic

I'm going to back puppy on this one. I'm going with... This team is void of talent.

Now, when we win 11 games this year with talent as shitty as '09... Who ya gonna give the credit to?

GrundleStiltzkin

sarktastic said:

I'm going to back puppy on this one. I'm going with... This team is void of talent.

Now, when we win 11 games this year with talent as shitty as '09... Who ya gonna give the credit to?

Uhhh, Sark, duh. It's his guys. Get back to me when Pete wins with his WAC OKGs ;-)

Dennis_DeYoung

chuck said:

You fail miserably in reading comprehension and flail around in a blind, drunken rage...staggering and swinging this way and that until you eventually hit the floor and pass out in a puddle of your own vomit.

You say that like it's a bad thing.

Fire_Marshall_Bill

Gladstone said:

Yale never said Sark needed ten years.

He's still a pompous tool, so fuck him.

chuck

Dennis_DeYoung said:

chuck said:

You fail miserably in reading comprehension and flail around in a blind, drunken rage...staggering and swinging this way and that until you eventually hit the floor and pass out in a puddle of your own vomit.

You say that like it's a bad thing.

I'm not here to judge. I just report what on what I see.

puppylove_sugarsteel

IrishDawg22 said:

puppylove_sugarsteel said:

Listen fuckers, Petersen wouldn't have went 5-7 with Locker and that crew in '09.There's a lot of similarities between that team and this squad.

Petersen has a great starting 22. The remaining roster is no better than UTAH's second unit. (as they haven't played down 1) Sark left Petersen a buttfucking mess not counting the starters. Pull your heads out and look.

This is why I love the bi-polar Puppy.

First statement is probably true. I think Coach Pete's game management would have turned around a couple of those close losses and got us to 7 or 8 wins.

But you are way off base if you think the roster in 09' is deeper than now. Across the board we are better off at every single position (depth wise) and it is not even close. The 09' probably had more top end talent at certain positions, but the depth was a joke. There were a lot of guys in the program that should have been applying their craft in Ellensburg.

Depth was a joke (prior to Pete's class). That's a fact and 5 years after Ty "0-12" team. Is it better now? Of course but not by a hell of a lot considering 5 recruiting classes