Alex Akita Fucking Stupid callback

TierbsHsotBoobs

huskyhooligan said:

Hardcore Husky: Rubbing two sticks together since 2010.

Spin that meat.

ThomasFremont

TierbsHsotBoobs said:

ThomasFremont said:

Gladstone said:

huskyhooligan said:

Interesting piece. I'm a middle of the road type of guy too (wink wink), and as someone who is acquainted to Alex I kind of see where he is or was coming from. For someone who was attending UW in the mid to late 2000's, UW football was frustrating and boring. With the exception of maybe a Carl Bonnell hail mary, or Anthony Russo touchdown (see how far the program was?), there wasn't much to beat ones chest about. Take into account the fact that Willingtolose sucked all of the fun out of the program, Sark and his antics were a breath of fresh air. Despite his clear flaws and the frustration that came from those, Sark's teams still made husky football palpable and somewhat relevant. So for many, giving Sark the benefit of doubt was easy. Also AA would take the insults as a compliment. He has always set out to create conversation and backlash.

I also knew Alex pretty well at UW but that doesn't excuse him. We were all mostly captivated by Sark year 1, and after beating USC we were all dooging out. This article, however, was written in 2013, five years into dudebrah's tenure with his failure evident for all with any standards and cognizance to see.

AA made his bed and now he reaps what he sows.

We? All?

No. Just, no.

IIRC, you were at the front of the line to bleaux Sark.

Yes, I coined the phrase after we "won" the LSU game.

So?

RaceBannon

ThomasFremont said:

TierbsHsotBoobs said:

ThomasFremont said:

Gladstone said:

huskyhooligan said:

Interesting piece. I'm a middle of the road type of guy too (wink wink), and as someone who is acquainted to Alex I kind of see where he is or was coming from. For someone who was attending UW in the mid to late 2000's, UW football was frustrating and boring. With the exception of maybe a Carl Bonnell hail mary, or Anthony Russo touchdown (see how far the program was?), there wasn't much to beat ones chest about. Take into account the fact that Willingtolose sucked all of the fun out of the program, Sark and his antics were a breath of fresh air. Despite his clear flaws and the frustration that came from those, Sark's teams still made husky football palpable and somewhat relevant. So for many, giving Sark the benefit of doubt was easy. Also AA would take the insults as a compliment. He has always set out to create conversation and backlash.

I also knew Alex pretty well at UW but that doesn't excuse him. We were all mostly captivated by Sark year 1, and after beating USC we were all dooging out. This article, however, was written in 2013, five years into dudebrah's tenure with his failure evident for all with any standards and cognizance to see.

AA made his bed and now he reaps what he sows.

We? All?

No. Just, no.

IIRC, you were at the front of the line to bleaux Sark.

Yes, I coined the phrase after we "won" the LSU game.

So?

The classy Husky fans rose as one to give the Tigers a standing ovation

ThomasFremont

RaceBannon said:

ThomasFremont said:

TierbsHsotBoobs said:

ThomasFremont said:

Gladstone said:

huskyhooligan said:

Interesting piece. I'm a middle of the road type of guy too (wink wink), and as someone who is acquainted to Alex I kind of see where he is or was coming from. For someone who was attending UW in the mid to late 2000's, UW football was frustrating and boring. With the exception of maybe a Carl Bonnell hail mary, or Anthony Russo touchdown (see how far the program was?), there wasn't much to beat ones chest about. Take into account the fact that Willingtolose sucked all of the fun out of the program, Sark and his antics were a breath of fresh air. Despite his clear flaws and the frustration that came from those, Sark's teams still made husky football palpable and somewhat relevant. So for many, giving Sark the benefit of doubt was easy. Also AA would take the insults as a compliment. He has always set out to create conversation and backlash.

I also knew Alex pretty well at UW but that doesn't excuse him. We were all mostly captivated by Sark year 1, and after beating USC we were all dooging out. This article, however, was written in 2013, five years into dudebrah's tenure with his failure evident for all with any standards and cognizance to see.

AA made his bed and now he reaps what he sows.

We? All?

No. Just, no.

IIRC, you were at the front of the line to bleaux Sark.

Yes, I coined the phrase after we "won" the LSU game.

So?

The classy Husky fans rose as one to give the Tigers a standing ovation

Before or after bleauxing Sark?

CFetters_Nacho_Lover

huskyhooligan said:

Hardcore Husky: Rubbing two sticks together since 2010.

huskyhooligan said:

Hardcore Husky: Rubbing two sticks together since 2010.

You need to look at the Lemon Party again; 3 sticks rubbing together.

EsophagealFeces

Tequilla said:

Gladstone said:

huskyhooligan said:

Interesting piece. I'm a middle of the road type of guy too (wink wink), and as someone who is acquainted to Alex I kind of see where he is or was coming from. For someone who was attending UW in the mid to late 2000's, UW football was frustrating and boring. With the exception of maybe a Carl Bonnell hail mary, or Anthony Russo touchdown (see how far the program was?), there wasn't much to beat ones chest about. Take into account the fact that Willingtolose sucked all of the fun out of the program, Sark and his antics were a breath of fresh air. Despite his clear flaws and the frustration that came from those, Sark's teams still made husky football palpable and somewhat relevant. So for many, giving Sark the benefit of doubt was easy. Also AA would take the insults as a compliment. He has always set out to create conversation and backlash.

I also knew Alex pretty well at UW but that doesn't excuse him. We were all mostly captivated by Sark year 1, and after beating USC we were all dooging out. This article, however, was written in 2013, five years into dudebrah's tenure with his failure evident for all with any standards and cognizance to see.

AA made his bed and now he reaps what he sows.

I think we were all dooging after beating USC in 2009. The program needed something to feel good about.

The hire of Seven was less than ideal but it was a hot shot coordinator from one of the top programs in the country. At minimum, you felt confident that he'd be able to get the program back to a reasonable level and leave it in a better position (at least perception wise) than what he took it over at.

The part of Seven that really pissed me off was the fact that I tend to take people at their word until they give me a reason not to. I want to believe. I want to have faith in the good side of people. I had started hearing some strong warning signs about him as early as 2010. But as is said often around here, if you are winning you can overlook some of the bad.

The part where Akita completely showed himself to be FS in this is that it's one thing whether you were in school when the team was good or bad. But if you are/were paying attention to college football at all, you'd know that there are traits that good teams show on a consistent basis. You know what a well coached team looks like. Then you have to answer the question as to whether the team that you are watching falls into that category. CONSISTENTLY Seven's teams showed themselves to not be a particularly well coached team and perhaps even more importantly you didn't see a number of players develop under him. By 2013, it was very clear that Seven is who Seven is ... a mediocre coach that is good enough to win when his talent is better than the opposition but rarely will win a game (and normally will require luck) to win games he shouldn't. Moreover, when he plays good teams does he not win, he often gets destroyed. These are all traits that you would associate with poor coaching.

The questions Akita should have been asking to his readers and in particular himself are 1) whether or not he's content with that kind of mediocrity Seven was showing to settle for it if it continued and 2) what specifically was Seven showing to make one believe that he was going to make the leap from mediocre coach towards that of an elite coach? The Owen Twelve experience caused an over-reaction to the other side of expectations. Most forget that the 2006 season was a probable bowl season had Stanback not gotten hurt ... and Tyrone did make the right call in not burning Locker's redshirt before he was ready to play. The 2007 season had the talent to be bowl eligible but consistently grasped defeat from the jaws of victory. The moral, as it has always been, is that for Washington to be a below .500 program required some epically bad coaching which he had in combining Slick's long-term management (great game day coach, terrible CEO of a program), Gilby (who had no desire to be a HC and had already failed epically at Cal), and Tyrone (who I think very clearly was done with coaching after the ND experience; not to mention that many of the traits that were seen in Tyrone's UW teams were also evident in his ND teams as well).

If you are willing to settle for mediocrity in life, then you just drift through it without ever really mattering. If you have higher standards for yourself, when you find yourself faced with moments of mediocrity, or are surrounded yourself by mediocrity, it pisses you off and you look to do something about it. All you have to do is look at Akita's background picture where he's acting like he's in Boyz II Men to realize that he's much more comfortable projecting himself on the heels of others, willing to make his name by taking shots at others, and not taking a stand, being controversial, or say something that may put him in the face of some backlash. In particular, the last part is what you expect from someone that is willing to lead and not accepting of mediocrity.

T









L









D









R