Scott Woodward's Job: Keep UW Football Moving Forward
Comments
-
No disciplinary action against those involved? You end practice early and then give the players involved a get out of jail free card? No accountability, he is losing that team. Starting to resemble his time in Atlanta and Seattle where he lost both teams.MikeDamone said:
Stop being a dumbass. Mora did exactly what I suggested Sark should have done. Instead he storms off to change his tampon.IMALOSER_ said:
No one has ever accused you of being accurate. 10 minutes, 30 minutes.........MikeDamone said:When Mora "cut practice short" are you referring to Monday when players were fighting and he made the team run sideline gasses for 30 minutes?
"Mora had the team run for 10 minutes, chewed out those involved in the altercation and lectured the team. He ordered players to huddle and left the field with most of his staff."
If Sark did the same thing half the morons on this site would be bitching that he cut practice short. They would call him a pussy for having a problem with players fighting. They would say he has lost control of the team.......blah, blah, blah.
That's my point. I don't care that Sark cut practice short and I don't care that Mora cut practice short. Some on here like to make it out to be a big thing.
bruinsnation.com/ucla-bruins-football-preason-2013/2013/8/13/4616890/day-5-evening-practice-starts-hot-ends-hotter-and-early
-
Straw man much?IMALOSER_ said:
No disciplinary action against those involved? You end practice early and then give the players involved a get out of jail free card? No accountability, he is losing that team. Starting to resemble his time in Atlanta and Seattle where he lost both teams.MikeDamone said:
Stop being a dumbass. Mora did exactly what I suggested Sark should have done. Instead he storms off to change his tampon.IMALOSER_ said:
No one has ever accused you of being accurate. 10 minutes, 30 minutes.........MikeDamone said:When Mora "cut practice short" are you referring to Monday when players were fighting and he made the team run sideline gasses for 30 minutes?
"Mora had the team run for 10 minutes, chewed out those involved in the altercation and lectured the team. He ordered players to huddle and left the field with most of his staff."
If Sark did the same thing half the morons on this site would be bitching that he cut practice short. They would call him a pussy for having a problem with players fighting. They would say he has lost control of the team.......blah, blah, blah.
That's my point. I don't care that Sark cut practice short and I don't care that Mora cut practice short. Some on here like to make it out to be a big thing.
bruinsnation.com/ucla-bruins-football-preason-2013/2013/8/13/4616890/day-5-evening-practice-starts-hot-ends-hotter-and-early -
But he doesn't like Sark
-
The below is a small sample, but it's a good indicator. No one knows if the chances of success are a low 7%, but a look at history beyond the PAC suggests the chances are way less than 50/50. I said many times during his first year, Steve had to make his mark no later than 2012. He failed. There is no positive spin to recast the F grade.
"A poster on the Dawgman.com forum studied all the pac-10 coaches and how they performed if they did not win 9-10 games in their first four to five years. The study showed that if a coach didn’t win 10 games in his first 4 years then he had a 7% chance of winning 10 games in the future. " -
How quickly did that thread get deleted or what was Kim, Eklund, F3 spin on that?Steve_Bowman said:The below is a small sample, but it's a good indicator. No one knows if the chances of success are a low 7%, but a look at history beyond the PAC suggests the chances are way less than 50/50. I said many times during his first year, Steve had to make his mark no later than 2012. He failed. There is no positive spin to recast the F grade.
"A poster on the Dawgman.com forum studied all the pac-10 coaches and how they performed if they did not win 9-10 games in their first four to five years. The study showed that if a coach didn’t win 10 games in his first 4 years then he had a 7% chance of winning 10 games in the future. " -
The posted poasted it on a thread that was already 2-3 pages deep. I don't think many people saw it.He_Needs_More_Time said:
How quickly did that thread get deleted or what was Kim, Eklund, F3 spin on that?Steve_Bowman said:The below is a small sample, but it's a good indicator. No one knows if the chances of success are a low 7%, but a look at history beyond the PAC suggests the chances are way less than 50/50. I said many times during his first year, Steve had to make his mark no later than 2012. He failed. There is no positive spin to recast the F grade.
"A poster on the Dawgman.com forum studied all the pac-10 coaches and how they performed if they did not win 9-10 games in their first four to five years. The study showed that if a coach didn’t win 10 games in his first 4 years then he had a 7% chance of winning 10 games in the future. "
-
Actually one post that I put up, "2012, The Year of Living Dangerously" was on the first page for a couple days and had several comments.
I got my ass ripped, but it was not deleted. This was in 2009 so saying we were screwed if we didn't have results by 2012 was not that objectionable to the dogboy staff. Mentioned were no blowouts, line develpment, toughness, discipline, etc and winning at least 9, 10 regular season games. This package won't be delivered this year either. (Nine games won't cut it for 2013.)
![[Deleted User]](https://wb.vanillicon.com/b14605887e2b6b59902271a0095c9265_100.png)
