Home› Hardcore Husky Board

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Sign In Register
Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.

UW's 1977 scrimmages

CirrhosisDawgCirrhosisDawg Member Posts: 6,390
in Hardcore Husky Board
Went 1-3. Lots of fucktards back then as well that said UW had hired the wrong coach (1977 being his third season).
Loss -- Miss St @‌ home 27-18
Win -- San Jose St @‌ 24-3
Loss --@ Syracuse 22-20
Loss --@ Minn. 19-17

Huskies beat Oregon the next week when the REAL season started, Went 6-1 in conference and beat Mich in the Rose Bowl 27-20. Finished 10th in the country. Lots of scrimmage season twisting going on.
· Share on FacebookShare on Twitter

Comments

  • IrishDawg22IrishDawg22 Member Posts: 2,754
    FYI...Oregon wasn't part of the real schedule in 77'.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • GladstoneGladstone Member Posts: 16,419
    Because internet. Sitting back and waiting doesn't make for good internet fodder.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • RoadDawg55RoadDawg55 Member Posts: 30,123
    edited September 2014
    Gladstone said:

    Because internet. Sitting back and waiting doesn't make for good internet fodder.

    I hear you. It wasn't meant to be taken literally. I'm just amazed some can't call it what it was, a shitty performance. It was a bad performance regardless of who was coaching. If Sark was still our coach, everyone here who still cared about the football team would be up in arms over it. Since Peterman is our coach, some refuse to criticize anything. I get it. Petersen is a great coach and he has earned that trust by going 93-12. I have complete trust in what he is doing and honestly an 8 win season wouldn't change that. He deserves time. That doesn't change the fact that we played awful and it was disappointing to watch.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • ApostleofGriefApostleofGrief Member Posts: 3,904
    CirrhosisDawg said:

    Went 1-3. Lots of fucktards back then as well that said UW had hired the wrong coach (1977 being his third season).
    Loss -- Miss St @‌ home 27-18
    Win -- San Jose St @‌ 24-3
    Loss --@ Syracuse 22-20
    Loss --@ Minn. 19-17

    Huskies beat Oregon the next week when the REAL season started, Went 6-1 in conference and beat Mich in the Rose Bowl 27-20. Finished 10th in the country. Lots of scrimmage season twisting going on.

    When people start rolling out this stat, watch out. I'm not saying it's doomsday time at all, I'm just saying,.... this stat is another surreptitious way of saying so-and-so is just like Don James, and it never comes out that way.

    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • ApostleofGriefApostleofGrief Member Posts: 3,904
    PS., I hope that liver is holding up.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • SwayeSwaye Moderator, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 41,548 Founders Club
    RoadDawg55 said:

    Gladstone said:

    Because internet. Sitting back and waiting doesn't make for good internet fodder.

    I hear you. It wasn't meant to be taken literally. I'm just amazed some can't call it what it was, a shitty performance. It was a bad performance regardless of who was coaching. If Sark was still our coach, everyone here who still cared about the football team would be up in arms over it. Since Peterman is our coach, some refuse to criticize anything. I get it. Petersen is a great coach and he has earned that trust by going 93-12. I have complete trust in what he is doing and honestly an 8 win season wouldn't change that. He deserves time. That doesn't change the fact that we played awful and it was disappointing to watch.
    You are right, but if we lose one of these scrimmages, I am going to drink myself to death anyway.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • SoutherndawgSoutherndawg Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 8,323 Founders Club
    RoadDawg55 said:

    Gladstone said:

    Because internet. Sitting back and waiting doesn't make for good internet fodder.

    I hear you. It wasn't meant to be taken literally. I'm just amazed some can't call it what it was, a shitty performance. It was a bad performance regardless of who was coaching. If Sark was still our coach, everyone here who still cared about the football team would be up in arms over it. Since Peterman is our coach, some refuse to criticize anything. I get it. Petersen is a great coach and he has earned that trust by going 93-12. I have complete trust in what he is doing and honestly an 8 win season wouldn't change that. He deserves time. That doesn't change the fact that we played awful and it was disappointing to watch.
    That game was very disappointing to watch. I expected much more from the Huskies. Still, anyone who has watched college football for any length of time knows that the first game of the season has the potential to be a real turd burger. And that was one full on shit filled turd burger of a game. In the end, they did manage to limp to a win, which was the only real positive takeaway. I think we all know the Armenian used car salesman would have found a way to lose that game. I do expect to see a big jump up in the level of play this week, but the season started in LIFPO mode and will stay that way until the team establishes itself, one way or the other.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • The_UndertakerThe_Undertaker Member Posts: 521
    edited September 2014
    RoadDawg55 said:

    There's no need to fluff him up with 1977's scrimmages. What happened in 1977 is completely irrelevant. There are plenty of examples where a shitty scrimmage forecasted a bad season as well. We are going to be a good team, but enough with defending a shitty performance. It was what it was, we are 1-0 like we all expected, and we will find out what kind of team we have coming up soon.

    Post of the week so far.
    Enough with the "James started with blabla against shit school in 19 something". For years this board has made fun of doogs using the same kind of comparison to back up Sark's incremental progress "yeah but Coach McDoog did this his first 5 years and look now how good he is". You can always find an example to fit your narrative.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • MikeDamoneMikeDamone Member Posts: 37,781
    This is interesting because the doogs used the first few seasons of Don James to prop up Sarks lousy performance.

    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • RaceBannonRaceBannon Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 107,763 Founders Club
    MikeDamone said:

    This is interesting because the doogs used the first few seasons of Don James to prop up Sarks lousy performance.

    I often talked to Don and Carol about that when I golfed with them

    #FleenorNameDrop
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • MikeDamoneMikeDamone Member Posts: 37,781
    RaceBannon said:

    MikeDamone said:

    This is interesting because the doogs used the first few seasons of Don James to prop up Sarks lousy performance.

    I often talked to Don and Carol about that when I golfed with them

    #FleenorNameDrop
    Are they dear, dear freinds?
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • pawzpawz Member, Moderator, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 21,291 Founders Club
    MikeDamone said:

    RaceBannon said:

    MikeDamone said:

    This is interesting because the doogs used the first few seasons of Don James to prop up Sarks lousy performance.

    I often talked to Don and Carol about that when I golfed with them

    #FleenorNameDrop
    Are they dear, dear freinds?


    GO!
















    HUSKIES!!














    GO!














    HUSKIES!!!
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
Sign In or Register to comment.