Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
UW's Vegas Bowl Debacle: Sarkisian Crapping out as Husky Coach
Hardcore_Husky
Administrator, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 304 
UW's Vegas Bowl Debacle: Sarkisian Crapping out as Husky Coach
When it comes to head football coaches, you gotta know when to hold 'em, and know when to fold 'em. Regarding the Steve Sarkisian era at Washington, the time has come to walk away... Or maybe even run.
Comments
Another reason that play troubles me is that it indicates that he's repeating old mistakes. Remember the UCLA game from his first year? The tight end catches a pass near the goal line that was obviously trapped. Sark conserves his timeouts, and doesn't challenge. Neuheisel wisely snaps the ball ASAP, scores, and goes on to win the game. The original problem was that when Sark was hired, we all complained that Washington was not a 'learn on the job' kind of program. The new and much bigger problem is that four years along, we're finding out that Sark isn't even doing that. He's not learning on the job. He's prone to the same gameday mistakes that plagued him in Year 1. This is bad.
I am not at all convinced that he will get much better, or that 2013 will be special. He will peak out as an occasional 8 or 9 win guy, but Seven Win Steve is just who he is. And that might just be good enough for this fanbase, as long as everybody has a nice time at the game. Stomp your feet all you want, Sark will be head coach here as long as he wants, as long as he can keep the December bowl losses rolling in.
1. Boise got jobbed on the forward progress spot on the third down play. Husky fans can shut the fuck up already about it.
2. There was no way in hell that video evidence could have overturned the fourth and 1 spot. That was a scrum.
As I mentioned before, that was a spot that required no measurement. Ball touches the line = first down BSU, ball short of line = first down UW. The ball was clearly spotted on the line. They don't have to give you a measurement in that situation because the series started exactly at the edge of the UW 42 yard line. Officials do this after every change of possession to reduce the need for measurements in a game. They do it at every level from pee wee football to the NFL.
The 4th and 1 play is around 2:14:10. If you watch the scrum, the ball is in Southwick's left hand and you get a pretty clear look at where he is. He gets stopped initially, but then gets a second push. He gets lost in the shuffle from the angle of the original broadcast. The camera angle that we have is certainly inconclusive, but the replay booth would be able to use multiple angles.
The key is that the guy who has the best look is the line judge(s). Watch the line judge come running down from the top of the screen to spot the ball. He's inches short of the 32 the ENTIRE time. The second line judge runs up from the bottom of the screen and is closer to the 32, I'd even say right on the 32.
No, I don't think the officials conspired to screw Washington. I think it was too close to call accurately at full game speed, and that alone warranted a challenge.
It's totally plausible that UW loses the review. But the replay official might well have noticed that the two line judges came up with slightly different spots and been forced to make a call. We'll never know, and the fact that we'll never know is entirely Sark's fault. Washington had all 3 timeouts, and there was 2:36 on the clock. Sark could've easily afforded to risk a single timeout to clear the question up. If it was our last timeout, I get it. Hold on to the timeout and give your offense a chance. He had 3.
By the way, Washington ended the game with one timeout. Sark took it into the locker room with him.
Again, I think that the camera angle we have is inconclusive, and nobody can say that the spot of the ball was correct after the two screw ups. That's still not on the officials, it's on the head coach.
And I am glad Larry saw the the same thing I did. Sven, not so much.
Sark is not the coach that's going to take us to the next level, that's painfully obvious to me. How about you knuckleheads?
Sark has shown very little ability to change his ways. The discipline is so lacking it's pathetic, as is the lack of toughness (physical and mental) of the team. And as DJ pointed out, the bodies of the team is underwhelming.
This issue at the end of the LV Bowl was a case in point explaining why Sarkisian is not the guy, and never will be. Never can be is probably more accurate. I'm not sure it's something he can learn; the guy just doesn't have head coach DNA. Anybody with a reasonable feel for the game would have managed that situation in a manner that at least put the team in a position to win.
That's the larger arc I think you're looking for, and that's what the spot discussion was all about. It was Sark in a nutshell: The man is a piss poor game manager with horrendous instincts, which turns him into a heavy liability that has to be overcome, even in games where the team is otherwise competitive.
Again, Sark IMO is a mediocre coach, and will get us mediocre results. Sucks.