Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
Pessimistic About Next Year And the Future (Tequilla Long)
Comments
-
Here's some year one perspective. Sark could have won against Notre Dame in 2009, but Ty didn't recruit good linemen to punch it in at the one. Sark could have won at ASU, but because Ty recruited so poorly, the young DB's messed up a crucial coverage at the end of the game. They will learn. Sark could have won at UCLA, but Jake made a fucktarded decision to go deep while driving for the winning score. It's not Sark's fault though, the team was 0-12 and Jake is still learning how to play QB because the old coaches failed him.CuntWaffle said:
Year 5 Sark vs year 1 Petermandhdawg said:
This. There seems to be a double standard here in regards to Petersen and sark. No one here made excuses when we lost by 3 to Stanford on the road a year ago, but it's okay to lose to ASU at home?RoadDawg55 said:
You are completely missing the point. What you aren't getting is that Sark was blamed by you and all fans who weren't dumbasses for not winning 9 games. In Sark's first, you blamed him for losing to UCLA, Notre Dame, and ASU. Petersen loses close, but winnable games and the same people blaming Sark are making excuses for Petersen. Coaches are judged by wins or losses. Anyone can sit and say Petersen is building something (I think he will). People said the same about Sark. The only difference is their resumes. We are talking about this season. Obviously nobody will give a fuck about winning 7 or 9, or 10 if he takes off in year 3 or 4, but call it like it is.MikeDamone said:
I think "there is no reason they couldn't beat ASU" was the call, right? Expect we all knew the offense is simply a mess. Barely D1 shit here.dhdawg said:
They were very capable of beating ASU, if the correct coaching adjustments were made and Petersen chose Lindquist and pounded them with the run all game, UW very well may have won that game.MikeDamone said:
It's not a failure to those who understand what's going on and who are paying attention. Take responsibility for your dooging it up.RoadDawg55 said:
Not really. A lot of half brains predicted 10+ wins. The schedule set up nicely. This season has been a failure so far. That's all I'm saying. Everyone knew this team had strengths and weaknesses and a championship was highly unlikely. You like to pretend you are right about everything, but according to you, we were going to lose to Cal and get plungered by ASU.MikeDamone said:Jesus. You're all over the fucking map. It's going to take a few more games. But by the middle to end of next year I belive we will see Petersen beginning to take the team to the next level. Any half brain with a computer knew this would be a hard year and next year will have ups and downs as well. Dumbfucks who bought into sark leaving "a full cupboard" and just add a winning coach would lead to 11 wins were dooging it up hard.
Lifpo
Here is what I said about ASU.
"I've watched all the UW games. 4 of them in person.
Late last night I watched oregon. with the benefit of 24 hours of perspective and a fast forward button.
If you think don't think UW has serious issues in several areas, I ask, do you watch UW games.
It's possible UW beats asu. That's why they play. Petersen could figure some stuff out. But they need to make some changes to win."
Saying this team was never capable of winning 10 games is ridiculous, they very might still win 9.
This season is a failure
Fuckin A people, this is serious doog/coog shit when we start talking about if not for this but for that they would have won.
Bottom line is they didn't. And the fucking offense did what we thought they would do and scored 3 points.
Wishing and hoping is a lot different than capable. So are possible and likely. Most everything is possible, but when the facts line up and you look at it, it's becomes unlikely.
Fuck, did DJ (ILTCHDJ) do something and somehow link this place to doogman?
HTH.
The halfbrains here mocked anyone who said any of those things, but they are some of Petersen's staunchest defenders. Petersen was a great hire, night and day compared to Sark and their resumes, and he may do big things here. If anything, expectations for Petersen should be higher because of that. Anyone can make excuses. Just fucking win. The Stanford and ASU games were games that could have been won with better coaching. Simple fact. -
I gave Sark a pass the first year. I never said sark was building anything. After 18 games in it was apparent he wasn't going to back up his yapper flapping.RoadDawg55 said:
You are completely missing the point. What you aren't getting is that Sark was blamed by you and all fans who weren't dumbasses for not winning 9 games. The team WAS capable of winning 9, Sark's ineptitude was the reason it didn't happen.MikeDamone said:
I think "there is no reason they couldn't beat ASU" was the call, right? Expect we all knew the offense is simply a mess. Barely D1 shit here.dhdawg said:
They were very capable of beating ASU, if the correct coaching adjustments were made and Petersen chose Lindquist and pounded them with the run all game, UW very well may have won that game.MikeDamone said:
It's not a failure to those who understand what's going on and who are paying attention. Take responsibility for your dooging it up.RoadDawg55 said:
Not really. A lot of half brains predicted 10+ wins. The schedule set up nicely. This season has been a failure so far. That's all I'm saying. Everyone knew this team had strengths and weaknesses and a championship was highly unlikely. You like to pretend you are right about everything, but according to you, we were going to lose to Cal and get plungered by ASU.MikeDamone said:Jesus. You're all over the fucking map. It's going to take a few more games. But by the middle to end of next year I belive we will see Petersen beginning to take the team to the next level. Any half brain with a computer knew this would be a hard year and next year will have ups and downs as well. Dumbfucks who bought into sark leaving "a full cupboard" and just add a winning coach would lead to 11 wins were dooging it up hard.
Lifpo
Here is what I said about ASU.
"I've watched all the UW games. 4 of them in person.
Late last night I watched oregon. with the benefit of 24 hours of perspective and a fast forward button.
If you think don't think UW has serious issues in several areas, I ask, do you watch UW games.
It's possible UW beats asu. That's why they play. Petersen could figure some stuff out. But they need to make some changes to win."
Saying this team was never capable of winning 10 games is ridiculous, they very might still win 9.
This season is a failure
Fuckin A people, this is serious doog/coog shit when we start talking about if not for this but for that they would have won.
Bottom line is they didn't. And the fucking offense did what we thought they would do and scored 3 points.
Wishing and hoping is a lot different than capable. So are possible and likely. Most everything is possible, but when the facts line up and you look at it, it's becomes unlikely.
Fuck, did DJ (ILTCHDJ) do something and somehow link this place to doogman?
In Sark's first season, you probably blamed him for losing to UCLA, Notre Dame, and ASU and rightfully so. Petersen loses close, but winnable games and the same people blaming Sark are making excuses for Petersen. Coaches are judged by wins or losses. Anyone can sit and say Petersen is building something (I think he will). People said the same about Sark. The only difference is their resumes. We are talking about this season. Obviously nobody will give a fuck about winning 7 or 9, or 10 in year one if he wins championships in year 3 or 4, but call it like it is.
Anyone can sit and say Peterson should win 11 games in the first year when most of the producers on offense left and after game fucking one it was apparent they weren't replaced. Those people are called doogs.
-
I was 21 in 2009 and was more worried about college tail and getting hammered than I was about UW football message boards so I was NOT a half brain back then.RoadDawg55 said:
Here's some year one perspective. Sark could have won against Notre Dame in 2009, but Ty didn't recruit good linemen to punch it in at the one. Sark could have won at ASU, but because Ty recruited so poorly, the young DB's messed up a crucial coverage at the end of the game. They will learn. Sark could have won at UCLA, but Jake made a fucktarded decision to go deep while driving for the winning score. It's not Sark's fault though, the team was 0-12 and Jake is still learning how to play QB because the old coaches failed him.CuntWaffle said:
Year 5 Sark vs year 1 Petermandhdawg said:
This. There seems to be a double standard here in regards to Petersen and sark. No one here made excuses when we lost by 3 to Stanford on the road a year ago, but it's okay to lose to ASU at home?RoadDawg55 said:
You are completely missing the point. What you aren't getting is that Sark was blamed by you and all fans who weren't dumbasses for not winning 9 games. In Sark's first, you blamed him for losing to UCLA, Notre Dame, and ASU. Petersen loses close, but winnable games and the same people blaming Sark are making excuses for Petersen. Coaches are judged by wins or losses. Anyone can sit and say Petersen is building something (I think he will). People said the same about Sark. The only difference is their resumes. We are talking about this season. Obviously nobody will give a fuck about winning 7 or 9, or 10 if he takes off in year 3 or 4, but call it like it is.MikeDamone said:
I think "there is no reason they couldn't beat ASU" was the call, right? Expect we all knew the offense is simply a mess. Barely D1 shit here.dhdawg said:
They were very capable of beating ASU, if the correct coaching adjustments were made and Petersen chose Lindquist and pounded them with the run all game, UW very well may have won that game.MikeDamone said:
It's not a failure to those who understand what's going on and who are paying attention. Take responsibility for your dooging it up.RoadDawg55 said:
Not really. A lot of half brains predicted 10+ wins. The schedule set up nicely. This season has been a failure so far. That's all I'm saying. Everyone knew this team had strengths and weaknesses and a championship was highly unlikely. You like to pretend you are right about everything, but according to you, we were going to lose to Cal and get plungered by ASU.MikeDamone said:Jesus. You're all over the fucking map. It's going to take a few more games. But by the middle to end of next year I belive we will see Petersen beginning to take the team to the next level. Any half brain with a computer knew this would be a hard year and next year will have ups and downs as well. Dumbfucks who bought into sark leaving "a full cupboard" and just add a winning coach would lead to 11 wins were dooging it up hard.
Lifpo
Here is what I said about ASU.
"I've watched all the UW games. 4 of them in person.
Late last night I watched oregon. with the benefit of 24 hours of perspective and a fast forward button.
If you think don't think UW has serious issues in several areas, I ask, do you watch UW games.
It's possible UW beats asu. That's why they play. Petersen could figure some stuff out. But they need to make some changes to win."
Saying this team was never capable of winning 10 games is ridiculous, they very might still win 9.
This season is a failure
Fuckin A people, this is serious doog/coog shit when we start talking about if not for this but for that they would have won.
Bottom line is they didn't. And the fucking offense did what we thought they would do and scored 3 points.
Wishing and hoping is a lot different than capable. So are possible and likely. Most everything is possible, but when the facts line up and you look at it, it's becomes unlikely.
Fuck, did DJ (ILTCHDJ) do something and somehow link this place to doogman?
HTH.
The halfbrains here mocked anyone who said any of those things, but they are some of Petersen's staunchest defenders. Petersen was a great hire, night and day compared to Sark and their resumes, and he may do big things here. If anything, expectations for Petersen should be higher because of that. Anyone can make excuses. Just fucking win. The Stanford and ASU games were games that could have been won with better coaching. Simple fact.
What should we do then since this season was a "failure" cry about it? Start screaming fire Peterman? Yea the losses have sucked but we have heard about how turning around this program wasn't going to be nearly as easy as everyone thought with Sark's mess.
I could kick, scream, and whine about how they haven't played perfect this year and ridicule CP non stop. Or I could LIPO like most people here said they were going to do but apparently that was completely not the case. -
Your first paragraph speaks to me, Cunt. I was in the same boat as you.CuntWaffle said:
I was 21 in 2009 and was more worried about college tail and getting hammered than I was about UW football message boards so I was NOT a half brain back then.RoadDawg55 said:
Here's some year one perspective. Sark could have won against Notre Dame in 2009, but Ty didn't recruit good linemen to punch it in at the one. Sark could have won at ASU, but because Ty recruited so poorly, the young DB's messed up a crucial coverage at the end of the game. They will learn. Sark could have won at UCLA, but Jake made a fucktarded decision to go deep while driving for the winning score. It's not Sark's fault though, the team was 0-12 and Jake is still learning how to play QB because the old coaches failed him.CuntWaffle said:
Year 5 Sark vs year 1 Petermandhdawg said:
This. There seems to be a double standard here in regards to Petersen and sark. No one here made excuses when we lost by 3 to Stanford on the road a year ago, but it's okay to lose to ASU at home?RoadDawg55 said:
You are completely missing the point. What you aren't getting is that Sark was blamed by you and all fans who weren't dumbasses for not winning 9 games. In Sark's first, you blamed him for losing to UCLA, Notre Dame, and ASU. Petersen loses close, but winnable games and the same people blaming Sark are making excuses for Petersen. Coaches are judged by wins or losses. Anyone can sit and say Petersen is building something (I think he will). People said the same about Sark. The only difference is their resumes. We are talking about this season. Obviously nobody will give a fuck about winning 7 or 9, or 10 if he takes off in year 3 or 4, but call it like it is.MikeDamone said:
I think "there is no reason they couldn't beat ASU" was the call, right? Expect we all knew the offense is simply a mess. Barely D1 shit here.dhdawg said:
They were very capable of beating ASU, if the correct coaching adjustments were made and Petersen chose Lindquist and pounded them with the run all game, UW very well may have won that game.MikeDamone said:
It's not a failure to those who understand what's going on and who are paying attention. Take responsibility for your dooging it up.RoadDawg55 said:
Not really. A lot of half brains predicted 10+ wins. The schedule set up nicely. This season has been a failure so far. That's all I'm saying. Everyone knew this team had strengths and weaknesses and a championship was highly unlikely. You like to pretend you are right about everything, but according to you, we were going to lose to Cal and get plungered by ASU.MikeDamone said:Jesus. You're all over the fucking map. It's going to take a few more games. But by the middle to end of next year I belive we will see Petersen beginning to take the team to the next level. Any half brain with a computer knew this would be a hard year and next year will have ups and downs as well. Dumbfucks who bought into sark leaving "a full cupboard" and just add a winning coach would lead to 11 wins were dooging it up hard.
Lifpo
Here is what I said about ASU.
"I've watched all the UW games. 4 of them in person.
Late last night I watched oregon. with the benefit of 24 hours of perspective and a fast forward button.
If you think don't think UW has serious issues in several areas, I ask, do you watch UW games.
It's possible UW beats asu. That's why they play. Petersen could figure some stuff out. But they need to make some changes to win."
Saying this team was never capable of winning 10 games is ridiculous, they very might still win 9.
This season is a failure
Fuckin A people, this is serious doog/coog shit when we start talking about if not for this but for that they would have won.
Bottom line is they didn't. And the fucking offense did what we thought they would do and scored 3 points.
Wishing and hoping is a lot different than capable. So are possible and likely. Most everything is possible, but when the facts line up and you look at it, it's becomes unlikely.
Fuck, did DJ (ILTCHDJ) do something and somehow link this place to doogman?
HTH.
The halfbrains here mocked anyone who said any of those things, but they are some of Petersen's staunchest defenders. Petersen was a great hire, night and day compared to Sark and their resumes, and he may do big things here. If anything, expectations for Petersen should be higher because of that. Anyone can make excuses. Just fucking win. The Stanford and ASU games were games that could have been won with better coaching. Simple fact.
What should we do then since this season was a "failure" cry about it? Start screaming fire Peterman? Yea the losses have sucked but we have heard about how turning around this program wasn't going to be nearly as easy as everyone thought with Sark's mess.
I could kick, scream, and whine about how they haven't played perfect this year and ridicule CP non stop. Or I could LIPO like most people here said they were going to do but apparently that was completely not the case.
The rest of it. Christ Cunt. You sound like a guy who posts on another site that talks about punching a hole in the keyboard. We are all LIPO. We know Petersen will get time. Nobody is ridiculing him. Wins get praised. Losses get over analyzed and criticized. Isn't that what message boards are for? -
I never said that you said Sark was building something. Many idiots did. Being a doog is bitching about an offense that is the worst in the conference? Talent isn't the only reason why. Who is and isn't a doog and what makes one a doog always changes here.MikeDamone said:
I gave Sark a pass the first year. I never said sark was building anything. After 18 games in it was apparent he wasn't going to back up his yapper flapping.RoadDawg55 said:
You are completely missing the point. What you aren't getting is that Sark was blamed by you and all fans who weren't dumbasses for not winning 9 games. The team WAS capable of winning 9, Sark's ineptitude was the reason it didn't happen.MikeDamone said:
I think "there is no reason they couldn't beat ASU" was the call, right? Expect we all knew the offense is simply a mess. Barely D1 shit here.dhdawg said:
They were very capable of beating ASU, if the correct coaching adjustments were made and Petersen chose Lindquist and pounded them with the run all game, UW very well may have won that game.MikeDamone said:
It's not a failure to those who understand what's going on and who are paying attention. Take responsibility for your dooging it up.RoadDawg55 said:
Not really. A lot of half brains predicted 10+ wins. The schedule set up nicely. This season has been a failure so far. That's all I'm saying. Everyone knew this team had strengths and weaknesses and a championship was highly unlikely. You like to pretend you are right about everything, but according to you, we were going to lose to Cal and get plungered by ASU.MikeDamone said:Jesus. You're all over the fucking map. It's going to take a few more games. But by the middle to end of next year I belive we will see Petersen beginning to take the team to the next level. Any half brain with a computer knew this would be a hard year and next year will have ups and downs as well. Dumbfucks who bought into sark leaving "a full cupboard" and just add a winning coach would lead to 11 wins were dooging it up hard.
Lifpo
Here is what I said about ASU.
"I've watched all the UW games. 4 of them in person.
Late last night I watched oregon. with the benefit of 24 hours of perspective and a fast forward button.
If you think don't think UW has serious issues in several areas, I ask, do you watch UW games.
It's possible UW beats asu. That's why they play. Petersen could figure some stuff out. But they need to make some changes to win."
Saying this team was never capable of winning 10 games is ridiculous, they very might still win 9.
This season is a failure
Fuckin A people, this is serious doog/coog shit when we start talking about if not for this but for that they would have won.
Bottom line is they didn't. And the fucking offense did what we thought they would do and scored 3 points.
Wishing and hoping is a lot different than capable. So are possible and likely. Most everything is possible, but when the facts line up and you look at it, it's becomes unlikely.
Fuck, did DJ (ILTCHDJ) do something and somehow link this place to doogman?
In Sark's first season, you probably blamed him for losing to UCLA, Notre Dame, and ASU and rightfully so. Petersen loses close, but winnable games and the same people blaming Sark are making excuses for Petersen. Coaches are judged by wins or losses. Anyone can sit and say Petersen is building something (I think he will). People said the same about Sark. The only difference is their resumes. We are talking about this season. Obviously nobody will give a fuck about winning 7 or 9, or 10 in year one if he wins championships in year 3 or 4, but call it like it is.
Anyone can sit and say Peterson should win 11 games in the first year when most of the producers on offense left and after game fucking one it was apparent they weren't replaced. Those people are called doogs. -
I just don't see how already being pessimistic for the future or saying "I am starting to wonder if Petersen is the coach we were looking for" or "Sark would have done better this year" (note that I am not saying you said these things, just a few posts I saw since Saturday) is LIPO... because it isn't. It is overreacting and not LIPO.RoadDawg55 said:
Your first paragraph speaks to me, Cunt. I was in the same boat as you.CuntWaffle said:
I was 21 in 2009 and was more worried about college tail and getting hammered than I was about UW football message boards so I was NOT a half brain back then.RoadDawg55 said:
Here's some year one perspective. Sark could have won against Notre Dame in 2009, but Ty didn't recruit good linemen to punch it in at the one. Sark could have won at ASU, but because Ty recruited so poorly, the young DB's messed up a crucial coverage at the end of the game. They will learn. Sark could have won at UCLA, but Jake made a fucktarded decision to go deep while driving for the winning score. It's not Sark's fault though, the team was 0-12 and Jake is still learning how to play QB because the old coaches failed him.CuntWaffle said:
Year 5 Sark vs year 1 Petermandhdawg said:
This. There seems to be a double standard here in regards to Petersen and sark. No one here made excuses when we lost by 3 to Stanford on the road a year ago, but it's okay to lose to ASU at home?RoadDawg55 said:
You are completely missing the point. What you aren't getting is that Sark was blamed by you and all fans who weren't dumbasses for not winning 9 games. In Sark's first, you blamed him for losing to UCLA, Notre Dame, and ASU. Petersen loses close, but winnable games and the same people blaming Sark are making excuses for Petersen. Coaches are judged by wins or losses. Anyone can sit and say Petersen is building something (I think he will). People said the same about Sark. The only difference is their resumes. We are talking about this season. Obviously nobody will give a fuck about winning 7 or 9, or 10 if he takes off in year 3 or 4, but call it like it is.MikeDamone said:
I think "there is no reason they couldn't beat ASU" was the call, right? Expect we all knew the offense is simply a mess. Barely D1 shit here.dhdawg said:
They were very capable of beating ASU, if the correct coaching adjustments were made and Petersen chose Lindquist and pounded them with the run all game, UW very well may have won that game.MikeDamone said:
It's not a failure to those who understand what's going on and who are paying attention. Take responsibility for your dooging it up.RoadDawg55 said:
Not really. A lot of half brains predicted 10+ wins. The schedule set up nicely. This season has been a failure so far. That's all I'm saying. Everyone knew this team had strengths and weaknesses and a championship was highly unlikely. You like to pretend you are right about everything, but according to you, we were going to lose to Cal and get plungered by ASU.MikeDamone said:Jesus. You're all over the fucking map. It's going to take a few more games. But by the middle to end of next year I belive we will see Petersen beginning to take the team to the next level. Any half brain with a computer knew this would be a hard year and next year will have ups and downs as well. Dumbfucks who bought into sark leaving "a full cupboard" and just add a winning coach would lead to 11 wins were dooging it up hard.
Lifpo
Here is what I said about ASU.
"I've watched all the UW games. 4 of them in person.
Late last night I watched oregon. with the benefit of 24 hours of perspective and a fast forward button.
If you think don't think UW has serious issues in several areas, I ask, do you watch UW games.
It's possible UW beats asu. That's why they play. Petersen could figure some stuff out. But they need to make some changes to win."
Saying this team was never capable of winning 10 games is ridiculous, they very might still win 9.
This season is a failure
Fuckin A people, this is serious doog/coog shit when we start talking about if not for this but for that they would have won.
Bottom line is they didn't. And the fucking offense did what we thought they would do and scored 3 points.
Wishing and hoping is a lot different than capable. So are possible and likely. Most everything is possible, but when the facts line up and you look at it, it's becomes unlikely.
Fuck, did DJ (ILTCHDJ) do something and somehow link this place to doogman?
HTH.
The halfbrains here mocked anyone who said any of those things, but they are some of Petersen's staunchest defenders. Petersen was a great hire, night and day compared to Sark and their resumes, and he may do big things here. If anything, expectations for Petersen should be higher because of that. Anyone can make excuses. Just fucking win. The Stanford and ASU games were games that could have been won with better coaching. Simple fact.
What should we do then since this season was a "failure" cry about it? Start screaming fire Peterman? Yea the losses have sucked but we have heard about how turning around this program wasn't going to be nearly as easy as everyone thought with Sark's mess.
I could kick, scream, and whine about how they haven't played perfect this year and ridicule CP non stop. Or I could LIPO like most people here said they were going to do but apparently that was completely not the case.
The rest of it. Christ Cunt. You sound like a guy who posts on another site that talks about punching a hole in the keyboard. We are all LIPO. We know Petersen will get time. Nobody is ridiculing him. Wins get praised. Losses get over analyzed and criticized. Isn't that what message boards are for? -
Don't know about you guys but I'm just enjoying going to the games on crisp Fall afternoon nights with my two dads, getting plastered and somehow making it back by 1am. Special!
-
While you doogs were getting "boners in your sweatpants" over Petersen...what did I say? Day 1 I said LIPO. We will know after 18 games. I might extend that a couple depending on the schedule, but roughly two years is enough to know. So far a pattern of bad coaching hasn't emerged.
-
Really - Maybe not 12th, but certainly 10th or 11th. I am pressed to think of a team I would wouldn't trade offenses with player for player with no cherry picking. Maybe OSU.dhdawg said:
Did you take that as me guaranteeing a win over ASU? That certainly wasn't what I was saying.MikeDamone said:
I think "there is no reason they couldn't beat ASU" was the call, right? Expect we all knew the offense is simply a mess. Barely D1 shit here.dhdawg said:
They were very capable of beating ASU, if the correct coaching adjustments were made and Petersen chose Lindquist and pounded them with the run all game, UW very well may have won that game.MikeDamone said:
It's not a failure to those who understand what's going on and who are paying attention. Take responsibility for your dooging it up.RoadDawg55 said:
Not really. A lot of half brains predicted 10+ wins. The schedule set up nicely. This season has been a failure so far. That's all I'm saying. Everyone knew this team had strengths and weaknesses and a championship was highly unlikely. You like to pretend you are right about everything, but according to you, we were going to lose to Cal and get plungered by ASU.MikeDamone said:Jesus. You're all over the fucking map. It's going to take a few more games. But by the middle to end of next year I belive we will see Petersen beginning to take the team to the next level. Any half brain with a computer knew this would be a hard year and next year will have ups and downs as well. Dumbfucks who bought into sark leaving "a full cupboard" and just add a winning coach would lead to 11 wins were dooging it up hard.
Lifpo
Here is what I said about ASU.
"I've watched all the UW games. 4 of them in person.
Late last night I watched oregon. with the benefit of 24 hours of perspective and a fast forward button.
If you think don't think UW has serious issues in several areas, I ask, do you watch UW games.
It's possible UW beats asu. That's why they play. Petersen could figure some stuff out. But they need to make some changes to win."
Saying this team was never capable of winning 10 games is ridiculous, they very might still win 9.
This season is a failure
Fuckin A people, this is serious doog/coog shit when we start talking about if not for this but for that they would have won.
Bottom line is they didn't. And the fucking offense did what we thought they would do and scored 3 points.
Wishing and hoping is a lot different than capable. So are possible and likely. Most everything is possible, but when the facts line up and you look at it, it's becomes unlikely.
Fuck, did DJ (ILTCHDJ) do something and somehow link this place to doogman?
I predicted a win last week, not feeling very good about it. I just meant if we lose I wasn't going to make excuses for Petersen if that were to happen. It was a completely winnable game.
This team has enough talent not to be 12th in the pac-12 in offense, there is no excuse for them to be as bad as they are. Why is it not okay to have high expectations?
I never said you guaranteed a win...you said there was "no reason" they couldn't win, when in fact, there were several reasons that made a win very unlikely. -
What does he need to do in those 18 games then? cause next year is likely going to be another step backMikeDamone said:While you doogs were getting "boners in your sweatpants" over Petersen...what did I say? Day 1 I said LIPO. We will know after 18 games. I might extend that a couple depending on the schedule, but roughly two years is enough to know. So far a pattern of bad coaching hasn't emerged.
