Softy: "Sark just needs signature win!"

Passion

Signature win? What does that even mean? I heard this on the radio yesterday, and I almost dialed in to ask if usc in 2009 was a signature win, or nebraska in San Diego in 2011.

All I hear is ASJ's suspension; how will Keith Price play this year; our stable of RBs; and Shaq Thompson and the LBs. That's it. Nothing about Danny Shelton being the only decent interior DL in Sark's 5 years. Potoa'e, Banks, and Lagafuaina all suck shit.

The first Seattle sportswriter, sports DJ, or anyone else in the mainstream media that stresses Sark's poor record of recruiting and developing interior DLs and OLs will have my respect. Until then, they're all just part of the problem.

[Deleted User]

His only signature win was against Stanford in 2012. Those other years you can't count according to FleenorFS.

Passion

By the way, a "signature win" is one that turns the direction of the program, and elevates the quality of play to a new level. That hasn't happened. Sark has turned no corner. 2009 Huskies are just as good as 2013 Huskies.

beelzebub

I dont know what it is i know what its not, Boise State.

TheKobeStopper

The signature win is a myth. Someone please show me the program than changed its direction with 1 win. It's the biggest doogism of all. The notion that all Sark or Ty or any shitty coach has to do is show up for 1 game and it will solve all their problems.

The truth is building a program is a shit ton of little tiny steps and only a few giant ones. And you can take all the big steps you want, you're never going anywhere without all the little ones.

Passion

TheKobeStopper said:

The signature win is a myth. Someone please show me the program than changed its direction with 1 win. It's the biggest doogism of all. The notion that all Sark or Ty or any shitty coach has to do is show up for 1 game and it will solve all their problems.

The truth is building a program is a shit ton of little tiny steps and only a few giant ones. And you can take all the big steps you want, you're never going anywhere without all the little ones.

1989 Freedom Bowl = Signature win.

Your second paragraph is accurate, but the little tiny steps you talk about are what lead to the "signature wins." Without recruiting well and designing and implementing a new and innovative defensive scheme, the signature win I listed above doesn't happen.

PostGameOrangeSlices

TheKobeStopper said:

The truth is building a program is a shit ton of little tiny steps and only a few giant ones. And you can take all the big steps you want, you're never going anywhere without all the little ones.

Step superiority guy

MikeDamone

TheKobeStopper said:

The signature win is a myth. Someone please show me the program than changed its direction with 1 win. It's the biggest doogism of all. The notion that all Sark or Ty or any shitty coach has to do is show up for 1 game and it will solve all their problems.

The truth is building a program is a shit ton of little tiny steps and only a few giant ones. And you can take all the big steps you want, you're never going anywhere without all the little ones.

Oregon, 1994, The Pick.

Hth

PostGameOrangeSlices

MikeDamone said:

TheKobeStopper said:

The signature win is a myth. Someone please show me the program than changed its direction with 1 win. It's the biggest doogism of all. The notion that all Sark or Ty or any shitty coach has to do is show up for 1 game and it will solve all their problems.

The truth is building a program is a shit ton of little tiny steps and only a few giant ones. And you can take all the big steps you want, you're never going anywhere without all the little ones.

Oregon, 1994, The Pick.

Hth

Thanks captain obvious

tracker

"Sark just needs signature win!" = Hope is a Strategy.

Fuck Softy.

[Deleted User]

Ty had a "signature" win vs Boise in 2007. Ty proceeded to go 2-21 after that game.

RaceBannon

1978 Rose Bowl

DerekJohnson

Stanford beating USC in Harbaugh's first year 2007.

TommySQC

Sure you can jump off a bridge and survive but I wouldn't advise it

[Deleted User]

DerekJohnson said:

Stanford beating USC in Harbaugh's first year 2007.

Was that a signature win though? That was as much of a signature win as Sark's over USC.

Stanford did what APAG describe they got better over time slowly. Right after that USC game they lost to a UW team at home on a 6 game losing streak. Had a losing season the following year and was only 8-5 year after that.

RoadDawg55

Fuck a signature win. And since when is beating a team that you are more talented then a signature win. Winning programs don't have signature wins because they are busy winning almost every game. Other than BCS bowl wins, there is no such thing as a signature win.

[Deleted User]

RoadDawg55 said:

Fuck a signature win. And since when is beating a team that you are more talented then a signature win. Winning programs don't have signature wins because they are busy winning almost every game. Other than BCS bowl wins, there is no such thing as a signature win.

Lambo and his "whammy in Miami" agree with you.

RoadDawg55

He_Needs_More_Time said:

RoadDawg55 said:

Fuck a signature win. And since when is beating a team that you are more talented then a signature win. Winning programs don't have signature wins because they are busy winning almost every game. Other than BCS bowl wins, there is no such thing as a signature win.

Lambo and his "whammy in Miami" agree with you.

That's a hell of a win, but it really didn't mean shit. I would rather have a Rose Bowl win.

Meek

Passion said:

By the way, a "signature win" is one that turns the direction of the program, and elevates the quality of play to a new level. That hasn't happened. Sark has turned no corner. 2009 Huskies are just as good as 2013 Huskies.

Hmmmm sounds like an inflection point win.

[Deleted User]

RoadDawg55 said:

He_Needs_More_Time said:

RoadDawg55 said:

Fuck a signature win. And since when is beating a team that you are more talented then a signature win. Winning programs don't have signature wins because they are busy winning almost every game. Other than BCS bowl wins, there is no such thing as a signature win.

Lambo and his "whammy in Miami" agree with you.

That's a hell of a win, but it really didn't mean shit. I would rather have a Rose Bowl win.

Big time win but it didn't lead to anything. Team went 7-4 that year and lost every road game after that.

I think signature wins are bull shit myself too. I've seen several times where a team has a big win then lay an egg immediately.

Sometimes teams use that win as a program momentum but most of that is what APAG pointed to with little details going into it and it finally producing.

Mad_Son

"Signature" wins come after a team has improved. It is something you identify retroactively. Once a team has elevated its play to a high level and begins to beat quality opponents then you can look back to the first quality win and say this is the "signature" win that marks when the program had turned a corner. To preemptively speculate something is a "signature" win is doogish. Results first. You need a crystal ball or "real" insider access to know a program has gotten good before you see it in the W column.