Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
FAN PODCAST: Analysis of 2013 Schedule & Metrics for Improvement
Comments
-
@PurpleJ bumpPurpleJ said:
Next time I will only talk about the podcast and just ignore the words you write in your posts.HeretoBeatmyChest said:
You initiated a rant based on nothing in the podcast.
Whatever.....but do jump in a fire though.
Silly me. I thought this was a message board or something.
If you have to blindly defend everything you say and downthumb everything I say in response, you won't last long. -
2nd ever poast on HH
-
We? did win 9. We luckily got rid of Sark and brought in Peterman. He went 8-6 and 7-6. This year is gonna be special though.RoadDawg55 said:
I appreciate the listen. I think it is fair to say we are experienced, but other than Parker, Price, and probably ASJ, the rest of the team will be back next year. I think that qualifies as a young team, seeing as we are only losing 3 good players. As long as one of the 4* QB's is good, we should have a very strong team in 2014.PurpleJ said:
I actually did listen to the whole thing.HeretoBeatmyChest said:
If you want to offer constructive criticism, next time listen before commenting on it. I never mentioned anything about a young team (IIRC). Better yet, just go dive head first into a bonfire.PurpleJ said:
There is a difference between having young talent and being a young team overall.HeretoBeatmyChest said:
Its possible to be young and experienced at the same time. Think Sankey, Shelton, Kasen, Timu, etc. These guys have experience but still have half their career left. Shaq could be considered experienced by the second half of this year (would be starting close to his 20th game). Whereas a guy who hasn't played until his 3rd or 4th year would be not experienced. Its actually a good position to be in and why we should expect to be a lot better this season and next season. Glad I could clear that up for you.PurpleJ said:
Does not compute.HeretoBeatmyChest said:
Its a young but experienced team who returns lots of players for this year but also next year.
Make sure to lather before you rinse.
You seem to be forgetting the part where we only lost a handful of players that were worth two shits from last years team. I count 13 Seniors and 24 Juniors on this years' roster. Go ahead and compare that to some of the other successful teams in the conference last year, if you want. The difference is coaching.
I respect the fact that you took the time to make a podcast and contribute content, but you should really consider some constructive criticism if you are to be successful with your future endeavors.
Also, the guy who won the Heisman last year was a Freshman. I don't really buy into the youth excuses.
You mentioned youth in your post. Did you not? That's why I was quoting it with the quotes and stuff.
Not trying to be a dick here. Just trying to give you a bit of perspective on the argument you made in your post.
The fire thing was creative, though. Props.
If we had a better coach, I would even say we should compete with Oregon for a Pac 12 title in 2014 because Stanford loses a lot of studs off their defense after this year. With Sark, I think we will be pretty good, but not as good as we should be. That's the problem with average coaches.
I agree whole heartedly about the problem being coaching. If it were up to me, Sark would already be gone after last year, but I do think if we won 9, there would be reason for some optimism for the future. -
I see this line being used again on this board.RaceBannon said:I'm stoned but this is funny
-
Did we bring in Petersen or did he just tell us he was coming?
-
I've wondered that myself.Meek said:Did we bring in Petersen or did he just tell us he was coming?
-
Post of the year. #minionRaceBannon said:I'm stoned but this is funny
-
I'm stoned but this is funny
-
LEAVE!PurpleJ said:Hopefully some of the classier posters over there will enter the fold. It's pretty hard to imagine a board without crepe's KrisVashon posts.
