Something kind of hit me after watching some of the Penn St dreckfest Saturday night and then arguing CFB with a PSU fan and a Pitt fan on Sunday while golfing.
Based on the actions post-Sandusky/Paterno, PSU clearly cares about winning at football. From the top of the institution on down. Things that get in the way of that - like a lack of institutional control to stop child rape - are just bumps in the road to a winning football program.
Washington, going back to Don James, isn't at the same level of all-importance of winning. DJ (I like to call him that) won too much and overshadowed upper campus so no fight was put up when our boosters were misbehaving. We hired Babs who put a focus on winning at non-football sports and did things like have meetings with all her head coaches where they had to say one positive thing accomplished by that team each week. And then all the things we did to fire Rick, "clean up" the program with savior Ty, and not investing in a real coach when it came to Sark. Victory and Ruins, yada yada, the institutional view is football has to do well enough to support all the other sports, and a good football team is nice, but don't want it to detract from the academics & other great things about UW.
Enter Petersen.
He has all of his points of emphasis and building blocks and philosophies and foundational principles for the team. He's got a thousand things he wants his student athletes players to do. He's actually trying to make them better people. It never says win at all costs. That's something upper campus can get completely behind.
It just so happens that all of his foundational principles lead to winning. A lot of fucking winning. But only as a byproduct of a process and philosophy that Upper Campus can love. There is no other coach I can think of which would be able to come in and win to the degree we expect him to while also not making the academics all ticked off. Saban, Meyer, etc? Can you imagine the outcry?
I know the season hasn't started yet and we have to LIFPO. But Poolboy is so fucking lucky that C. Pete decided he needed a change and wanted this job.
eh, honestly, I've never bought into the "upper campus fucked us up" routine quite to the degree most husky fans do. it's human nature - when something shitty happens to us, we prefer to have people to point at so that we can hate them and have fun doing that instead.
i was there when Gerbs was president, and I get more or less what he was about. but this idea that we had/have some kind of Stanford upper campus is exaggerated. yeah, I get it - they pissed off James by not standing by him, and he quit, and maybe that was the reason why. don't really know. I think it was all just a bunch of unlucky shit at the end of the day, and there's no guaranty that DJ would have continued to dominate like he did. scholly limits were coming anyway - i for one blame that as much as anything. i think it was important as hell to be the only game in town in the PNW and that's just gone now.
this academic/athletic tension exists all over the place, including at schools you'd never think give a shit about the ivory tower ... but the admins always care about that.
Donna Shalala has ramped up Miami to be a top 50 institution (usually now outranking us), and I don't think for a second that she's the reason they suck. They've just made a series of bad hires, and getting the right coach often involves serendipity. Watch the 30 for 30 on the U and learn something. Tad Foote was an academic cock sucker of the first order. A total egg head/snob who wanted to make Miami into an academic leader in the region. This fuck head was in charge down there back when Miami was really Miami. Talk about tension between the football program and upper campus. Jimmy Johnson HATED Tad Foote, and I'm sure the feeling was mutual. Didn't matter.
Nobody outside of the academies has higher upper campus standards than Furd, and they've made a run. Do we really have admins that take academics more seriously than they do at Michigan? At UCLA? At Texas? At Wisconsin? I don't think so. Is upper campus why Michigan hasn't been worth a shit in forever? Probably not, and UW is not an academic peer of Michigan's (sorry, much as I would like it to be, it's not). Michigan's academic peers are Berkeley and Virginia.
we've been playing this violin forever. we don't have any harder of a time getting the "right" guys in here than anyone else because of our administration. I just don't see that. We just haven't gotten it right, like so many other programs. Once you lose the winner, the odds of finding another one right away, based on history, is small.
I think winning is sufficiently important at UW. Maybe not Alabama important, but that's a unique standard. I think it's adequately important, but like so many programs, we are demonstrating that it's a lot easier to fuck up a hire than it is to get it right. That, to me, is 99.9% of why we are where we are.
sorry boss. when you only have a pretend legal career, you have a lot of time on your hands. I know that's not the most salient response, but it's all I got right now.
Something kind of hit me after watching some of the Penn St dreckfest Saturday night and then arguing CFB with a PSU fan and a Pitt fan on Sunday while golfing.
Based on the actions post-Sandusky/Paterno, PSU clearly cares about winning at football. From the top of the institution on down. Things that get in the way of that - like a lack of institutional control to stop child rape - are just bumps in the road to a winning football program.
Washington, going back to Don James, isn't at the same level of all-importance of winning. DJ (I like to call him that) won too much and overshadowed upper campus so no fight was put up when our boosters were misbehaving. We hired Babs who put a focus on winning at non-football sports and did things like have meetings with all her head coaches where they had to say one positive thing accomplished by that team each week. And then all the things we did to fire Rick, "clean up" the program with savior Ty, and not investing in a real coach when it came to Sark. Victory and Ruins, yada yada, the institutional view is football has to do well enough to support all the other sports, and a good football team is nice, but don't want it to detract from the academics & other great things about UW.
Enter Petersen.
He has all of his points of emphasis and building blocks and philosophies and foundational principles for the team. He's got a thousand things he wants his student athletes players to do. He's actually trying to make them better people. It never says win at all costs. That's something upper campus can get completely behind.
It just so happens that all of his foundational principles lead to winning. A lot of fucking winning. But only as a byproduct of a process and philosophy that Upper Campus can love. There is no other coach I can think of which would be able to come in and win to the degree we expect him to while also not making the academics all ticked off. Saban, Meyer, etc? Can you imagine the outcry?
I know the season hasn't started yet and we have to LIFPO. But Poolboy is so fucking lucky that C. Pete decided he needed a change and wanted this job.
eh, honestly, I've never bought into the "upper campus fucked us up" routine quite to the degree most husky fans do. it's human nature - when something shitty happens to us, we prefer to have people to point at so that we can hate them and have fun doing that instead.
i was there when Gerbs was president, and I get more or less what he was about. but this idea that we had/have some kind of Stanford upper campus is exaggerated. yeah, I get it - they pissed off James by not standing by him, and he quit, and maybe that was the reason why. don't really know. I think it was all just a bunch of unlucky shit at the end of the day, and there's no guaranty that DJ would have continued to dominate like he did. scholly limits were coming anyway - i for one blame that as much as anything. i think it was important as hell to be the only game in town in the PNW and that's just gone now.
this academic/athletic tension exists all over the place, including at schools you'd never think give a shit about the ivory tower ... but the admins always care about that.
Donna Shalala has ramped up Miami to be a top 50 institution (usually now outranking us), and I don't think for a second that she's the reason they suck. They've just made a series of bad hires, and getting the right coach often involves serendipity. Watch the 30 for 30 on the U and learn something. Tad Foote was an academic cock sucker of the first order. A total egg head/snob who wanted to make Miami into an academic leader in the region. This fuck head was in charge down there back when Miami was really Miami. Talk about tension between the football program and upper campus. Jimmy Johnson HATED Tad Foote, and I'm sure the feeling was mutual. Didn't matter.
Nobody outside of the academies has higher upper campus standards than Furd, and they've made a run. Do we really have admins that take academics more seriously than they do at Michigan? At UCLA? At Texas? At Wisconsin? I don't think so. Is upper campus why Michigan hasn't been worth a shit in forever? Probably not, and UW is not an academic peer of Michigan's (sorry, much as I would like it to be, it's not). Michigan's academic peers are Berkeley and Virginia.
we've been playing this violin forever. we don't have any harder of a time getting the "right" guys in here than anyone else because of our administration. I just don't see that. We just haven't gotten it right, like so many other programs. Once you lose the winner, the odds of finding another one right away, based on history, is small.
I think winning is sufficiently important at UW. Maybe not Alabama important, but that's a unique standard. I think it's adequately important, but like so many programs, we are demonstrating that it's a lot easier to fuck up a hire than it is to get it right. That, to me, is 99.9% of why we are where we are.
It's not whether or not we actually have a Stanford upper campus, it's whether the upper campus believes we should. It's about the culture of the organization. Stanford always won in the smart sports more than they won in football. That was their culture. Our culture was football first, nothing else matters, but the upper campus didn't like that and tried to change it. We needed that culture in order to win big but I don't think we have the football first mentality that others do.
Michigan is a good example. Their culture is to focus at football. WAY more than Cal and UVA combined. I think we've lost that focus and getting it back is tough. But Petersen can deliver the wins while also being the type of coach that the academics can't get on his ass for being too football focused.
"Washington, going back to Don James, isn't at the same level of all-importance of winning. DJ (I like to call him that) won too much and overshadowed upper campus so no fight was put up when our boosters were misbehaving. We hired Babs who put a focus on winning at non-football sports and did things like have meetings with all her head coaches where they had to say one positive thing accomplished by that team each week. And then all the things we did to fire Rick, "clean up" the program with savior Ty, and not investing in a real coach when it came to Sark. Victory and Ruins, yada yada, the institutional view is football has to do well enough to support all the other sports, and a good football team is nice, but don't want it to detract from the academics & other great things about UW."
Gooberdick and Barbie are gone now. We can only hope that upper campus has changed enough to see that a winning football program is not a threat to them.
I don't think that upper campus is as against football success as others want to believe ... but at the same time, I absolutely do think that they want to win "the right way." Most of the power brokers look at the UW as a world class institution (and rightfully so) and they don't want the football program to be full of thugs and messing up that image. It's far better when the program is full of good kids that keep their name out of the police blotter.
Thinking back how everything went down with (praise be to) PatHadenFS thinking he pulled the wool over our eyes by taking Sark, the thing that never gets talked about enough in my mind is how Pool Boy never publicly worked hard to try to get him. In fact, what came out publicly right after the firing was Pool Boy telling the team that it was his job to go get them a CHAMPIONSHIP level coach. Behind the scenes, there's been a lot of (alleged) feelings that the Athletic Dept (and I'm assuming as a by product upper campus) was getting very tired of Sark's act of having to cover up his indiscretions, used car salesman tactics, and in general keeping him from making the school look like an ass.
Pool Boy used to be a strong spokesperson where you saw him in the news all the time talking about the football program, etc. Now? Haven't really heard much from him at all since Petersen's been here. It's as if he's comfortable with the fact that he has a grown up in charge of the program that he can just turn the keys over to and know that his vision and values match those of the University of Washington and as a result, he can go back to his cabana and get some R&R in.
The other thing though that was missing from the post though was that it was Petersen who pursued this job as much as anything else. Pool Boy (probably rightfully so) didn't even think about Petersen given the number of jobs that he had turned down. The perception was always that Petersen was never going to leave Boise. But in listening to Petersen talk, it seems quite clear to me that THIS was the job that he wanted because he knew it had the perfect mix of expectations combined with values of any job that he could have (save for maybe a place like Stanford).
In the end, we're lucky that we have Petersen as our coach and absolutely agree with the notion that there's a greater than 81% chance that this will be his last job in college football.
I don't think that upper campus is as against football success as others want to believe ... but at the same time, I absolutely do think that they want to win "the right way." Most of the power brokers look at the UW as a world class institution (and rightfully so) and they don't want the football program to be full of thugs and messing up that image. It's far better when the program is full of good kids that keep their name out of the police blotter.
Thinking back how everything went down with (praise be to) PatHadenFS thinking he pulled the wool over our eyes by taking Sark, the thing that never gets talked about enough in my mind is how Pool Boy never publicly worked hard to try to get him. In fact, what came out publicly right after the firing was Pool Boy telling the team that it was his job to go get them a CHAMPIONSHIP level coach. Behind the scenes, there's been a lot of (alleged) feelings that the Athletic Dept (and I'm assuming as a by product upper campus) was getting very tired of Sark's act of having to cover up his indiscretions, used car salesman tactics, and in general keeping him from making the school look like an ass.
Pool Boy used to be a strong spokesperson where you saw him in the news all the time talking about the football program, etc. Now? Haven't really heard much from him at all since Petersen's been here. It's as if he's comfortable with the fact that he has a grown up in charge of the program that he can just turn the keys over to and know that his vision and values match those of the University of Washington and as a result, he can go back to his cabana and get some R&R in.
The other thing though that was missing from the post though was that it was Petersen who pursued this job as much as anything else. Pool Boy (probably rightfully so) didn't even think about Petersen given the number of jobs that he had turned down. The perception was always that Petersen was never going to leave Boise. But in listening to Petersen talk, it seems quite clear to me that THIS was the job that he wanted because he knew it had the perfect mix of expectations combined with values of any job that he could have (save for maybe a place like Stanford).
In the end, we're lucky that we have Petersen as our coach and absolutely agree with the notion that there's a greater than 81% chance that this will be his last job in college football.
You really think that we, as in UW, has higher values than other institutions in the conference? And that Peterson was attracted to said values.
Oh my goodness. I always underestimate how naive people can be.
Based on more than I could ever recount that is just such self-serving made-up bull shit. It's leftover garbage from the days when we had to hang out hats on something because wining football seemed a million miles away.
This has to be whoosh, right? I'd much rather lose to Oregon and go 12-1 since we'd still have a shot to win the Pac-12 (Oregon usually Coug's it and gets manhandled by Stanford or drops a game on the road before their skill guys cry croc tears on the sidelines).
Perhaps the bigger question is will the Doogs be able to handle a potentially decent year in 2015 when 4 of 5 starting OL are gone and Shelton, Kikaha, E. Hudson, A. Hudson, Timu, and probably Shaq are gone as well?
Since Sark and Coz largely whiffed on the 2011, 2012, and 2013 OL classes (and then didn't really coach them up when they were in the program), our OL could be subpar and we'll be rebuilding the defense.
Something kind of hit me after watching some of the Penn St dreckfest Saturday night and then arguing CFB with a PSU fan and a Pitt fan on Sunday while golfing.
Based on the actions post-Sandusky/Paterno, PSU clearly cares about winning at football. From the top of the institution on down. Things that get in the way of that - like a lack of institutional control to stop child rape - are just bumps in the road to a winning football program.
Washington, going back to Don James, isn't at the same level of all-importance of winning. DJ (I like to call him that) won too much and overshadowed upper campus so no fight was put up when our boosters were misbehaving. We hired Babs who put a focus on winning at non-football sports and did things like have meetings with all her head coaches where they had to say one positive thing accomplished by that team each week. And then all the things we did to fire Rick, "clean up" the program with savior Ty, and not investing in a real coach when it came to Sark. Victory and Ruins, yada yada, the institutional view is football has to do well enough to support all the other sports, and a good football team is nice, but don't want it to detract from the academics & other great things about UW.
Enter Petersen.
He has all of his points of emphasis and building blocks and philosophies and foundational principles for the team. He's got a thousand things he wants his student athletes players to do. He's actually trying to make them better people. It never says win at all costs. That's something upper campus can get completely behind.
It just so happens that all of his foundational principles lead to winning. A lot of fucking winning. But only as a byproduct of a process and philosophy that Upper Campus can love. There is no other coach I can think of which would be able to come in and win to the degree we expect him to while also not making the academics all ticked off. Saban, Meyer, etc? Can you imagine the outcry?
I know the season hasn't started yet and we have to LIFPO. But Poolboy is so fucking lucky that C. Pete decided he needed a change and wanted this job.
I don't think that upper campus is as against football success as others want to believe ... but at the same time, I absolutely do think that they want to win "the right way." Most of the power brokers look at the UW as a world class institution (and rightfully so) and they don't want the football program to be full of thugs and messing up that image. It's far better when the program is full of good kids that keep their name out of the police blotter.
Thinking back how everything went down with (praise be to) PatHadenFS thinking he pulled the wool over our eyes by taking Sark, the thing that never gets talked about enough in my mind is how Pool Boy never publicly worked hard to try to get him. In fact, what came out publicly right after the firing was Pool Boy telling the team that it was his job to go get them a CHAMPIONSHIP level coach. Behind the scenes, there's been a lot of (alleged) feelings that the Athletic Dept (and I'm assuming as a by product upper campus) was getting very tired of Sark's act of having to cover up his indiscretions, used car salesman tactics, and in general keeping him from making the school look like an ass.
Pool Boy used to be a strong spokesperson where you saw him in the news all the time talking about the football program, etc. Now? Haven't really heard much from him at all since Petersen's been here. It's as if he's comfortable with the fact that he has a grown up in charge of the program that he can just turn the keys over to and know that his vision and values match those of the University of Washington and as a result, he can go back to his cabana and get some R&R in.
The other thing though that was missing from the post though was that it was Petersen who pursued this job as much as anything else. Pool Boy (probably rightfully so) didn't even think about Petersen given the number of jobs that he had turned down. The perception was always that Petersen was never going to leave Boise. But in listening to Petersen talk, it seems quite clear to me that THIS was the job that he wanted because he knew it had the perfect mix of expectations combined with values of any job that he could have (save for maybe a place like Stanford).
In the end, we're lucky that we have Petersen as our coach and absolutely agree with the notion that there's a greater than 81% chance that this will be his last job in college football.
You really think that we, as in UW, has higher values than other institutions in the conference? And that Peterson was attracted to said values.
Oh my goodness. I always underestimate how naive people can be.
Based on more than I could ever recount that is just such self-serving made-up bull shit. It's leftover garbage from the days when we had to hang out hats on something because wining football seemed a million miles away.
I don't necessarily think that we have higher values than some of the other institutions (speaking mainly about Stanford, Cal, UCLA, and USC), but I do think that we in the Northwest tend to suffer a bit from an inferiority complex and as a result we try to pop off and puff out our chest when we have good things to brag out so that we can pull out the "I told you so."
We also have a massive perception issue where we are very concerned in this area about being PC about everything. It's not so much that the 12's won the Super Bowl, but it's how great of people the 12's are ... that Russell Wilson goes to the Hospital every week, that they tend to stay out of the police blotter, etc. etc. etc. (even though they continually forget about the drug-related suspensions 12-18 months ago).
I think Cal just sits back and worries about their academics. They've never been serious about sports in the grand scheme of things. Stanford pushes their other sports as much as football but even with all of their success you never get the impression that they are going to get all concerned when they aren't good in the future. If anything, they're happy that they've found a secret sauce that works for them that allows them to be consistently competitive instead of being on/off.
UCLA cares far more about basketball than football and anytime you get ads on TV about UCLA it's always promoting either their academics or how smart their athletes are from an academic standpoint.
USC is able to sweep a lot under the rug as a private institution so they normally give the middle finger to anybody that calls them on their BS. While SC is strong academically, they could care less if they are known for that globally and are far more concerned about how their football program looks.
UW is somewhere in the middle. We want the academic reputation of the UC schools, to be compared on a similar level as Stanford ... but we also want the football success of SC. I always get the impression that we want to win at the SC levels but be viewed as a great academic institution on top of it. We definitely don't have the win at all costs mentality that SC does ... but probably moreso than anybody else in the conference that mixes academics with athletics (a school like Oregon doesn't really count to me because their academics suck in comparison).
This has to be whoosh, right? I'd much rather lose to Oregon and go 12-1 since we'd still have a shot to win the Pac-12 (Oregon usually Coug's it and gets manhandled by Stanford or drops a game on the road before their skill guys cry croc tears on the sidelines).
I don't think that upper campus is as against football success as others want to believe ... but at the same time, I absolutely do think that they want to win "the right way." Most of the power brokers look at the UW as a world class institution (and rightfully so) and they don't want the football program to be full of thugs and messing up that image. It's far better when the program is full of good kids that keep their name out of the police blotter.
Thinking back how everything went down with (praise be to) PatHadenFS thinking he pulled the wool over our eyes by taking Sark, the thing that never gets talked about enough in my mind is how Pool Boy never publicly worked hard to try to get him. In fact, what came out publicly right after the firing was Pool Boy telling the team that it was his job to go get them a CHAMPIONSHIP level coach. Behind the scenes, there's been a lot of (alleged) feelings that the Athletic Dept (and I'm assuming as a by product upper campus) was getting very tired of Sark's act of having to cover up his indiscretions, used car salesman tactics, and in general keeping him from making the school look like an ass.
Pool Boy used to be a strong spokesperson where you saw him in the news all the time talking about the football program, etc. Now? Haven't really heard much from him at all since Petersen's been here. It's as if he's comfortable with the fact that he has a grown up in charge of the program that he can just turn the keys over to and know that his vision and values match those of the University of Washington and as a result, he can go back to his cabana and get some R&R in.
The other thing though that was missing from the post though was that it was Petersen who pursued this job as much as anything else. Pool Boy (probably rightfully so) didn't even think about Petersen given the number of jobs that he had turned down. The perception was always that Petersen was never going to leave Boise. But in listening to Petersen talk, it seems quite clear to me that THIS was the job that he wanted because he knew it had the perfect mix of expectations combined with values of any job that he could have (save for maybe a place like Stanford).
In the end, we're lucky that we have Petersen as our coach and absolutely agree with the notion that there's a greater than 81% chance that this will be his last job in college football.
You really think that we, as in UW, has higher values than other institutions in the conference? And that Peterson was attracted to said values.
Oh my goodness. I always underestimate how naive people can be.
Based on more than I could ever recount that is just such self-serving made-up bull shit. It's leftover garbage from the days when we had to hang out hats on something because wining football seemed a million miles away.
I don't necessarily think that we have higher values than some of the other institutions (speaking mainly about Stanford, Cal, UCLA, and USC), but I do think that we in the Northwest tend to suffer a bit from an inferiority complex and as a result we try to pop off and puff out our chest when we have good things to brag out so that we can pull out the "I told you so."
We also have a massive perception issue where we are very concerned in this area about being PC about everything. It's not so much that the 12's won the Super Bowl, but it's how great of people the 12's are ... that Russell Wilson goes to the Hospital every week, that they tend to stay out of the police blotter, etc. etc. etc. (even though they continually forget about the drug-related suspensions 12-18 months ago).
I think Cal just sits back and worries about their academics. They've never been serious about sports in the grand scheme of things. Stanford pushes their other sports as much as football but even with all of their success you never get the impression that they are going to get all concerned when they aren't good in the future. If anything, they're happy that they've found a secret sauce that works for them that allows them to be consistently competitive instead of being on/off.
UCLA cares far more about basketball than football and anytime you get ads on TV about UCLA it's always promoting either their academics or how smart their athletes are from an academic standpoint.
USC is able to sweep a lot under the rug as a private institution so they normally give the middle finger to anybody that calls them on their BS. While SC is strong academically, they could care less if they are known for that globally and are far more concerned about how their football program looks.
UW is somewhere in the middle. We want the academic reputation of the UC schools, to be compared on a similar level as Stanford ... but we also want the football success of SC. I always get the impression that we want to win at the SC levels but be viewed as a great academic institution on top of it. We definitely don't have the win at all costs mentality that SC does ... but probably moreso than anybody else in the conference that mixes academics with athletics (a school like Oregon doesn't really count to me because their academics suck in comparison).
Haha, care to elaborate? Who cares if we beat Oregon and go 5-4 in conference? Wouldn't you rather go 8-1? I just want to win the Pac-12 North and of course beating Oregon would really help but I'd rather lose to Oregon and win the Pac-12 North than beat them and finish 2nd or 3rd in the North.
This is again assuming you weren't trying to whoosh in your original post...
This has to be whoosh, right? I'd much rather lose to Oregon and go 12-1 since we'd still have a shot to win the Pac-12 (Oregon usually Coug's it and gets manhandled by Stanford or drops a game on the road before their skill guys cry croc tears on the sidelines).
Haha, care to elaborate? Who cares if we beat Oregon and go 5-4 in conference? Wouldn't you rather go 8-1? I just want to win the Pac-12 North and of course beating Oregon would really help but I'd rather lose to Oregon and win the Pac-12 North than beat them and finish 2nd or 3rd in the North.
This is again assuming you weren't trying to whoosh in your original post...
This has to be whoosh, right? I'd much rather lose to Oregon and go 12-1 since we'd still have a shot to win the Pac-12 (Oregon usually Coug's it and gets manhandled by Stanford or drops a game on the road before their skill guys cry croc tears on the sidelines).
I don't think that upper campus is as against football success as others want to believe ... but at the same time, I absolutely do think that they want to win "the right way." Most of the power brokers look at the UW as a world class institution (and rightfully so) and they don't want the football program to be full of thugs and messing up that image. It's far better when the program is full of good kids that keep their name out of the police blotter.
Thinking back how everything went down with (praise be to) PatHadenFS thinking he pulled the wool over our eyes by taking Sark, the thing that never gets talked about enough in my mind is how Pool Boy never publicly worked hard to try to get him. In fact, what came out publicly right after the firing was Pool Boy telling the team that it was his job to go get them a CHAMPIONSHIP level coach. Behind the scenes, there's been a lot of (alleged) feelings that the Athletic Dept (and I'm assuming as a by product upper campus) was getting very tired of Sark's act of having to cover up his indiscretions, used car salesman tactics, and in general keeping him from making the school look like an ass.
Pool Boy used to be a strong spokesperson where you saw him in the news all the time talking about the football program, etc. Now? Haven't really heard much from him at all since Petersen's been here. It's as if he's comfortable with the fact that he has a grown up in charge of the program that he can just turn the keys over to and know that his vision and values match those of the University of Washington and as a result, he can go back to his cabana and get some R&R in.
The other thing though that was missing from the post though was that it was Petersen who pursued this job as much as anything else. Pool Boy (probably rightfully so) didn't even think about Petersen given the number of jobs that he had turned down. The perception was always that Petersen was never going to leave Boise. But in listening to Petersen talk, it seems quite clear to me that THIS was the job that he wanted because he knew it had the perfect mix of expectations combined with values of any job that he could have (save for maybe a place like Stanford).
In the end, we're lucky that we have Petersen as our coach and absolutely agree with the notion that there's a greater than 81% chance that this will be his last job in college football.
You really think that we, as in UW, has higher values than other institutions in the conference? And that Peterson was attracted to said values.
Oh my goodness. I always underestimate how naive people can be.
Based on more than I could ever recount that is just such self-serving made-up bull shit. It's leftover garbage from the days when we had to hang out hats on something because wining football seemed a million miles away.
I don't necessarily think that we have higher values than some of the other institutions (speaking mainly about Stanford, Cal, UCLA, and USC), but I do think that we in the Northwest tend to suffer a bit from an inferiority complex and as a result we try to pop off and puff out our chest when we have good things to brag out so that we can pull out the "I told you so."
We also have a massive perception issue where we are very concerned in this area about being PC about everything. It's not so much that the 12's won the Super Bowl, but it's how great of people the 12's are ... that Russell Wilson goes to the Hospital every week, that they tend to stay out of the police blotter, etc. etc. etc. (even though they continually forget about the drug-related suspensions 12-18 months ago).
I think Cal just sits back and worries about their academics. They've never been serious about sports in the grand scheme of things. Stanford pushes their other sports as much as football but even with all of their success you never get the impression that they are going to get all concerned when they aren't good in the future. If anything, they're happy that they've found a secret sauce that works for them that allows them to be consistently competitive instead of being on/off.
UCLA cares far more about basketball than football and anytime you get ads on TV about UCLA it's always promoting either their academics or how smart their athletes are from an academic standpoint.
USC is able to sweep a lot under the rug as a private institution so they normally give the middle finger to anybody that calls them on their BS. While SC is strong academically, they could care less if they are known for that globally and are far more concerned about how their football program looks.
UW is somewhere in the middle. We want the academic reputation of the UC schools, to be compared on a similar level as Stanford ... but we also want the football success of SC. I always get the impression that we want to win at the SC levels but be viewed as a great academic institution on top of it. We definitely don't have the win at all costs mentality that SC does ... but probably moreso than anybody else in the conference that mixes academics with athletics (a school like Oregon doesn't really count to me because their academics suck in comparison).
Comments
Michigan is a good example. Their culture is to focus at football. WAY more than Cal and UVA combined. I think we've lost that focus and getting it back is tough. But Petersen can deliver the wins while also being the type of coach that the academics can't get on his ass for being too football focused.
I don't think that upper campus is as against football success as others want to believe ... but at the same time, I absolutely do think that they want to win "the right way." Most of the power brokers look at the UW as a world class institution (and rightfully so) and they don't want the football program to be full of thugs and messing up that image. It's far better when the program is full of good kids that keep their name out of the police blotter.
Thinking back how everything went down with (praise be to) PatHadenFS thinking he pulled the wool over our eyes by taking Sark, the thing that never gets talked about enough in my mind is how Pool Boy never publicly worked hard to try to get him. In fact, what came out publicly right after the firing was Pool Boy telling the team that it was his job to go get them a CHAMPIONSHIP level coach. Behind the scenes, there's been a lot of (alleged) feelings that the Athletic Dept (and I'm assuming as a by product upper campus) was getting very tired of Sark's act of having to cover up his indiscretions, used car salesman tactics, and in general keeping him from making the school look like an ass.
Pool Boy used to be a strong spokesperson where you saw him in the news all the time talking about the football program, etc. Now? Haven't really heard much from him at all since Petersen's been here. It's as if he's comfortable with the fact that he has a grown up in charge of the program that he can just turn the keys over to and know that his vision and values match those of the University of Washington and as a result, he can go back to his cabana and get some R&R in.
The other thing though that was missing from the post though was that it was Petersen who pursued this job as much as anything else. Pool Boy (probably rightfully so) didn't even think about Petersen given the number of jobs that he had turned down. The perception was always that Petersen was never going to leave Boise. But in listening to Petersen talk, it seems quite clear to me that THIS was the job that he wanted because he knew it had the perfect mix of expectations combined with values of any job that he could have (save for maybe a place like Stanford).
In the end, we're lucky that we have Petersen as our coach and absolutely agree with the notion that there's a greater than 81% chance that this will be his last job in college football.
Oh my goodness. I always underestimate how naive people can be.
Based on more than I could ever recount that is just such self-serving made-up bull shit. It's leftover garbage from the days when we had to hang out hats on something because wining football seemed a million miles away.
Since Sark and Coz largely whiffed on the 2011, 2012, and 2013 OL classes (and then didn't really coach them up when they were in the program), our OL could be subpar and we'll be rebuilding the defense.
Doogs are going to Doog though.
We also have a massive perception issue where we are very concerned in this area about being PC about everything. It's not so much that the 12's won the Super Bowl, but it's how great of people the 12's are ... that Russell Wilson goes to the Hospital every week, that they tend to stay out of the police blotter, etc. etc. etc. (even though they continually forget about the drug-related suspensions 12-18 months ago).
I think Cal just sits back and worries about their academics. They've never been serious about sports in the grand scheme of things. Stanford pushes their other sports as much as football but even with all of their success you never get the impression that they are going to get all concerned when they aren't good in the future. If anything, they're happy that they've found a secret sauce that works for them that allows them to be consistently competitive instead of being on/off.
UCLA cares far more about basketball than football and anytime you get ads on TV about UCLA it's always promoting either their academics or how smart their athletes are from an academic standpoint.
USC is able to sweep a lot under the rug as a private institution so they normally give the middle finger to anybody that calls them on their BS. While SC is strong academically, they could care less if they are known for that globally and are far more concerned about how their football program looks.
UW is somewhere in the middle. We want the academic reputation of the UC schools, to be compared on a similar level as Stanford ... but we also want the football success of SC. I always get the impression that we want to win at the SC levels but be viewed as a great academic institution on top of it. We definitely don't have the win at all costs mentality that SC does ... but probably moreso than anybody else in the conference that mixes academics with athletics (a school like Oregon doesn't really count to me because their academics suck in comparison).
This is again assuming you weren't trying to whoosh in your original post...
creepycoug stole your password