How much of the change with Texas happened because of the QB change to go with it? Also, Strong being on a very hot seat had to have accelerated that - don't you think?
Big difference IMO between college and pro changes at the coordinator position. Maybe I'm wrong there.
The offense is a dumpster fire. I'll be happy just to see an identity on offense. That's the biggest piece that is missing to me.
If Smith hasn't been fired at this point, it's not happening in season. This was the time to do it if it was going to happen.
I don't think that there are many that are of the opinion that Smith likely needs to go in the offseason and Petersen needs to look in the mirror from an offensive standpoint.
But at the same time, going into the season, many were talking about letting the season play out and realizing there were going to be a lot of starts and stops to the season and that the second half likely would be better than the first. Well, we just had a stop part of the season Saturday and many have blown a gasket.
I get the need to vent ... but this was a developmental year the entire time. There are some things breaking in our favor and some areas of development happening faster than we were expecting. The offense MUST BE fixed heading into next year. I'd like to see it improve during the year and I think that will happen just from young players getting better. But it's the identity that is the issue and problem. The rest is just symptomatic of it.
Cal just had their best defensive performance in three years against UW. The Boise State game was one of the worst offensive clunkers I have ever watched. Do you actually think it's going to get a lot better, especially if we do the same shit? The hardest games are still to come.
Do I think that there are going to be some good/bad games from the offense as we go through the year? Yes.
Do I think that we're going to be able to accurately predict which games we will see the good/bad performance in? No.
It's going to be an inconsistent offense that has parts established with the lack of identity from Pete/Smith and parts coming from several young players struggling with the consistency required to play PAC football.
I think even you'd admit that there's been some good plays called this year that just have been poorly executed. The offensive failures have problems at all levels ... but the ultimate buck stops at those who are responsible for it ... Smith for coordinating the dumpster fire and Petersen for hiring Smith.
Smith can fix the problem by improving the on-field performance. That doesn't look likely.
Petersen can fix the problem by removing Smith after the season. That looks likely.
How much Petersen will look in the mirror and be willing to admit that his offense needs some help we'll see depending on who it is he hires as his next coordinator.
The one thing that is getting very little play around here is that I'm as fed up with Pease as I am with Smith at this point. I'm not seeing a damn thing from Pease that makes me comfortable with him going forward.
Yeah, let's blame the WRs coach. That's where the true problem lies.
Jesus titty fucking CHRIST.
What is wrong with him saying he is fed up with Pease too? I feel like you are just going scorched earth here on people at this point. Pease is shit, Smith is shit. He's not blaming him for everything, he is just saying he sucks at his job too.
Perspective is really TUFF for some
Fuck perspective.
Nice to see the REAL Tequilla stand up.
You're completely full of yourself ...
If you think I'm happy with being mediocre, then you clearly don't have a good handle on who I am.
Disagree
"I would have been satisfied with 6 [wins]"
So let me get this straight ...
You are trying to spin me being happy with being mediocre by citing that I said that before the season I would be satisfied with a win total of 50-75% more than the general consensus for UW, including those in Vegas that make their share of money by being right on these kinds of things?
Wow, just wow.
Do you base your satisfaction on the season on how well UW does against what vegas sets the line at or do you adjust the definition of mediocre based on the vegas line?
you're having a rough day today buddy... maybe take a break
I haven't had to pull this one out since doogman days but here goes.
In his FIRST year Don James beat USC for the first UW win in 10 years AND beat UCLA, the first LA sweep in many years. UW played CAL for the ROSE BOWL in November. (and lost).
His non conference games were ASU who would go 12-0 and Texas along with Navy. Oh and a little trip to ALABAMA. He was 5-2 in the Pac 8.
They were 3-4 his second year the won the ROSE BOWL and popped off his third.
Yes I would have fired him but there is no fucking comparison between James and GilbyTySarkPetermen and their shitty first and second years.
FUCK
Does this mean WE r going to the Rosebowl next year?
I awesomed this poast, but I'm on the list by your standards.
Most great coaches have it turned around year three, if at all. Not earlier. Damone hasn't even turned up to tell us about 15 games, or whatever the fuck the metric was.
Grab a bottle of fireball, take a walk, beat your wife, get perspective.
You must be a duck, which is telling because CFB history is >1994. Dig a little deeper, history is on my side.
Or tell us more how you wold have fired Don James.
If we aren't near the top of the conference next year (which is always special), burn this bitch down.
I haven't had to pull this one out since doogman days but here goes.
In his FIRST year Don James beat USC for the first UW win in 10 years AND beat UCLA, the first LA sweep in many years. UW played CAL for the ROSE BOWL in November. (and lost).
His non conference games were ASU who would go 12-0 and Texas along with Navy. Oh and a little trip to ALABAMA. He was 5-2 in the Pac 8.
They were 3-4 his second year the won the ROSE BOWL and popped off his third.
Yes I would have fired him but there is no fucking comparison between James and GilbyTySarkPetermen and their shitty first and second years.
I haven't had to pull this one out since doogman days but here goes.
In his FIRST year Don James beat USC for the first UW win in 10 years AND beat UCLA, the first LA sweep in many years. UW played CAL for the ROSE BOWL in November. (and lost).
His non conference games were ASU who would go 12-0 and Texas along with Navy. Oh and a little trip to ALABAMA. He was 5-2 in the Pac 8.
They were 3-4 his second year the won the ROSE BOWL and popped off his third.
Yes I would have fired him but there is no fucking comparison between James and GilbyTySarkPetermen and their shitty first and second years.
FUCK
Does this mean WE r going to the Rosebowl next year?
Look at it this way, if Smith and the offense suck again USC, there are 9 days to get a new OC until the Oregon game at home (who have a more experienced OL and QBs but have a much worse QB situation that the Huskies do).
On another note, I was about to watch just 25% or so of the Cal - UW game on a friend's phone but it seems to me that it's Cal and Stanford in the Pac-12 North and UCLA and USC in the Pac-12 South (though Sarkisian is due for a letdown game, especially if USC starts looking ahead to Notre Dame and / or Utah as next week's game gets closer).
USC has a bye while Cal, Stanford, and UCLA are playing again this week...all 3 are heavy favorites to win again:
Cal -17.5 vs. WSU Stanford -14 vs. Arizona UCLA -14 vs. ASU
I haven't had to pull this one out since doogman days but here goes.
In his FIRST year Don James beat USC for the first UW win in 10 years AND beat UCLA, the first LA sweep in many years. UW played CAL for the ROSE BOWL in November. (and lost).
His non conference games were ASU who would go 12-0 and Texas along with Navy. Oh and a little trip to ALABAMA. He was 5-2 in the Pac 8.
They were 3-4 his second year the won the ROSE BOWL and popped off his third.
Yes I would have fired him but there is no fucking comparison between James and GilbyTySarkPetermen and their shitty first and second years.
FUCK
Does this mean WE r going to the Rosebowl next year?
No
BUMP!
Technically, @RaceBannon was right, no Rose Bowl for us!
I awesomed this poast, but I'm on the list by your standards.
Most great coaches have it turned around year three, if at all. Not earlier. Damone hasn't even turned up to tell us about 15 games, or whatever the fuck the metric was.
Grab a bottle of fireball, take a walk, beat your wife, get perspective.
You must be a duck, which is telling because CFB history is >1994. Dig a little deeper, history is on my side.
Or tell us more how you wold have fired Don James.
If we aren't near the top of the conference next year (which is always special), burn this bitch down.
I haven't had to pull this one out since doogman days but here goes.
In his FIRST year Don James beat USC for the first UW win in 10 years AND beat UCLA, the first LA sweep in many years. UW played CAL for the ROSE BOWL in November. (and lost).
His non conference games were ASU who would go 12-0 and Texas along with Navy. Oh and a little trip to ALABAMA. He was 5-2 in the Pac 8.
They were 3-4 his second year the won the ROSE BOWL and popped off his third.
Yes I would have fired him but there is no fucking comparison between James and GilbyTySarkPetermen and their shitty first and second years.
Comments
you're having a rough day today buddy... maybe take a break
Staff, true?1?
No
On another note, I was about to watch just 25% or so of the Cal - UW game on a friend's phone but it seems to me that it's Cal and Stanford in the Pac-12 North and UCLA and USC in the Pac-12 South (though Sarkisian is due for a letdown game, especially if USC starts looking ahead to Notre Dame and / or Utah as next week's game gets closer).
USC has a bye while Cal, Stanford, and UCLA are playing again this week...all 3 are heavy favorites to win again:
Cal -17.5 vs. WSU
Stanford -14 vs. Arizona
UCLA -14 vs. ASU
BUMP!
Technically, @RaceBannon was right, no Rose Bowl for us!