@Tequilla Oct 2015 - "I've been saying for a while that Smith (and Pease) should be fired at end of season ... failure to do so by Petersen puts it on him and would be a fireable event in my mind"
@Tequilla Feb 2016 - "But I don't think it is indefensible to give Smith another crack with a more experienced team and not risk setting back some still young players with a new playbook and system in Year #2."
I like to say that Petersen should be fired if he doesnt get rid of Smith and then say its not indefensible to give Smith another season... that is what I like to do.
What changed? Other than the 2nd half of the season, nothing. But changing opinion based on demonstrated improvement in performanceplaying worse teams is an executable offense.
FTFY
"Tie a cement rock to the foot and throw him off [Smith] Alcatraz on the way home" to "Smith did just enough" because UW beat up on some of the worst defensive teams in the country to finish out the season.
You act like it was a surprise UW finished out the season against WSU, OSU, and some shit tier bowl team.
First 6 games, opponents record 42-35 Last 6 games, opponents record 43-35
Next.
You probably think you made a point
Let me try again, old-timer. On average, the quality of opponents at the beginning of the year was on par with the quality of opponents at the end of the year.
Screw that. Win or GTFO. Fire Peterman today.
That's not true at all
You may not want it to be true, but the facts say otherwise.
First 6 games, opponents record 42-35 Last 6 games, opponents record 43-35
I like to equate 6 games (3 P12, 2 MW, 1 Big Sky) to 6 games (6 P12). I do that.
I'm not exactly sure what you're implying here.
You would think that the offensive results should be better against 3 P12, 2 MW, and 1 Big Sky teams than against 6 P12 conference teams - agreed?
I'm implying that bisecting the season and comparing opponent's records is not a good indicator of the schedule getting easier or harder. That's because these 6 games vs 6 games is not a good comparison.
The point AZHusky is trying to make is that the schedule did not get easier at the end of the season because the opponent's records are nearly identical.
How about we divide the conference schedule into thirds?
First (Cal, USC, Oregon) Opp record 25-15 UW 1-2
Second (Stan, AZ, Utah) Opp record 29-11 UW 1-2
Third (ASU, OSU, WSU) Opp record 17-21 UW 2-1
There's no question that you can divide data into anything to fit an argument and whether you split the schedule into halves or the conference season into thirds can completely allow for the data to fit the narrative ...
The Stanford game I'm not sure is really relevant because all that game proved was that Magna Carta was nowhere close to ready for PAC play.
Personally, I'm not entirely sure that I buy the schedule was easier/harder or whatever argument to begin with. I think it has way more to do with the fact that the youth on offense whether it was Browning, Gaskin, or the OL got more of their feet under them and started producing.
The argument that the production was tied to shitty defenses really doesn't resonate with me as well. Utah had arguably the 2nd best defense in the conference. Poor defenses that we struggled with in the first half of the season (Cal and Oregon) we didn't struggle with in the 2nd half of the season (Arizona schools).
You have excuses every time you are wrong. You are never wrong, just like Aubbie is meet wrong. I appreciate you even though I hate you as a poster and i question whether AuburnDawg is one of your two dads.
I'm wrong plenty ... anybody that thinks that they are right all (or even a vast majority) of the time is full of shit.
Now, if I don't sit there and say "I'm wrong" enough for your liking ... then tough shit. And BTW, when I do say that I was wrong, or perhaps take new information and form a new opinion, I get hit with the "moving the goalposts" crap.
I learned a long time ago that regardless of what I say or do, for whatever reason people have some kind of opinion about it. There are people that are 100% in my corner and will do anything for me. There are other people that want to take shots at me any opportunity that they get. Such is life.
Glad that you appreciate the podcast ... we try to keep it light hearted and entertaining while balancing some amount of seriousness. Delicate balance.
If you can admit that you are wrong then it shouldnt be so difficult to clear the field...
@Tequilla Oct 2015 - "I've been saying for a while that Smith (and Pease) should be fired at end of season ... failure to do so by Petersen puts it on him and would be a fireable event in my mind"
@Tequilla Feb 2016 - "But I don't think it is indefensible to give Smith another crack with a more experienced team and not risk setting back some still young players with a new playbook and system in Year #2."
given that both statements are not compatible with each other, in which statement were you wrong?
Ill be waiting for your county politician response
You have excuses every time you are wrong. You are never wrong, just like Aubbie is meet wrong. I appreciate you even though I hate you as a poster and i question whether AuburnDawg is one of your two dads.
I'm wrong plenty ... anybody that thinks that they are right all (or even a vast majority) of the time is full of shit.
Now, if I don't sit there and say "I'm wrong" enough for your liking ... then tough shit. And BTW, when I do say that I was wrong, or perhaps take new information and form a new opinion, I get hit with the "moving the goalposts" crap.
I learned a long time ago that regardless of what I say or do, for whatever reason people have some kind of opinion about it. There are people that are 100% in my corner and will do anything for me. There are other people that want to take shots at me any opportunity that they get. Such is life.
Glad that you appreciate the podcast ... we try to keep it light hearted and entertaining while balancing some amount of seriousness. Delicate balance.
If you can admit that you are wrong then it shouldnt be so difficult to clear the field...
@Tequilla Oct 2015 - "I've been saying for a while that Smith (and Pease) should be fired at end of season ... failure to do so by Petersen puts it on him and would be a fireable event in my mind"
@Tequilla Feb 2016 - "But I don't think it is indefensible to give Smith another crack with a more experienced team and not risk setting back some still young players with a new playbook and system in Year #2."
given that both statements are not compatible with each other, in which statement were you wrong?
Ill be waiting for your county politician response
If you can't properly quote me you won't get a response ... try again
You have excuses every time you are wrong. You are never wrong, just like Aubbie is meet wrong. I appreciate you even though I hate you as a poster and i question whether AuburnDawg is one of your two dads.
I'm wrong plenty ... anybody that thinks that they are right all (or even a vast majority) of the time is full of shit.
Now, if I don't sit there and say "I'm wrong" enough for your liking ... then tough shit. And BTW, when I do say that I was wrong, or perhaps take new information and form a new opinion, I get hit with the "moving the goalposts" crap.
I learned a long time ago that regardless of what I say or do, for whatever reason people have some kind of opinion about it. There are people that are 100% in my corner and will do anything for me. There are other people that want to take shots at me any opportunity that they get. Such is life.
Glad that you appreciate the podcast ... we try to keep it light hearted and entertaining while balancing some amount of seriousness. Delicate balance.
If you can admit that you are wrong then it shouldnt be so difficult to clear the field...
@Tequilla Oct 2015 - "I've been saying for a while that Smith (and Pease) should be fired at end of season ... failure to do so by Petersen puts it on him and would be a fireable event in my mind"
@Tequilla Feb 2016 - "But I don't think it is indefensible to give Smith another crack with a more experienced team and not risk setting back some still young players with a new playbook and system in Year #2."
given that both statements are not compatible with each other, in which statement were you wrong?
Ill be waiting for your county politician response
If you can't properly quote me you won't get a response ... try again
@Tequilla Oct 2015 - "I've been saying for a while that Smith (and Pease) should be fired at end of season ... failure to do so by Petersen puts it on him and would be a fireable event in my mind"
@Tequilla Feb 2016 - "But I don't think it is indefensible to give Smith another crack with a more experienced team and not risk setting back some still young players with a new playbook and system in Year #2."
I like to say that Petersen should be fired if he doesnt get rid of Smith and then say its not indefensible to give Smith another season... that is what I like to do.
What changed? Other than the 2nd half of the season, nothing. But changing opinion based on demonstrated improvement in performanceplaying worse teams is an executable offense.
FTFY
"Tie a cement rock to the foot and throw him off [Smith] Alcatraz on the way home" to "Smith did just enough" because UW beat up on some of the worst defensive teams in the country to finish out the season.
You act like it was a surprise UW finished out the season against WSU, OSU, and some shit tier bowl team.
First 6 games, opponents record 42-35 Last 6 games, opponents record 43-35
Next.
You probably think you made a point
Let me try again, old-timer. On average, the quality of opponents at the beginning of the year was on par with the quality of opponents at the end of the year.
Screw that. Win or GTFO. Fire Peterman today.
That's not true at all
You may not want it to be true, but the facts say otherwise.
First 6 games, opponents record 42-35 Last 6 games, opponents record 43-35
I like to equate 6 games (3 P12, 2 MW, 1 Big Sky) to 6 games (6 P12). I do that.
I'm not exactly sure what you're implying here.
You would think that the offensive results should be better against 3 P12, 2 MW, and 1 Big Sky teams than against 6 P12 conference teams - agreed?
I'm implying that bisecting the season and comparing opponent's records is not a good indicator of the schedule getting easier or harder. That's because these 6 games vs 6 games is not a good comparison.
The point AZHusky is trying to make is that the schedule did not get easier at the end of the season because the opponent's records are nearly identical.
How about we divide the conference schedule into thirds?
You have excuses every time you are wrong. You are never wrong, just like Aubbie is meet wrong. I appreciate you even though I hate you as a poster and i question whether AuburnDawg is one of your two dads.
I'm wrong plenty ... anybody that thinks that they are right all (or even a vast majority) of the time is full of shit.
Now, if I don't sit there and say "I'm wrong" enough for your liking ... then tough shit. And BTW, when I do say that I was wrong, or perhaps take new information and form a new opinion, I get hit with the "moving the goalposts" crap.
I learned a long time ago that regardless of what I say or do, for whatever reason people have some kind of opinion about it. There are people that are 100% in my corner and will do anything for me. There are other people that want to take shots at me any opportunity that they get. Such is life.
Glad that you appreciate the podcast ... we try to keep it light hearted and entertaining while balancing some amount of seriousness. Delicate balance.
If you can admit that you are wrong then it shouldnt be so difficult to clear the field...
@Tequilla Oct 2015 - "I've been saying for a while that Smith (and Pease) should be fired at end of season ... failure to do so by Petersen puts it on him and would be a fireable event in my mind"
@Tequilla Feb 2016 - "But I don't think it is indefensible to give Smith another crack with a more experienced team and not risk setting back some still young players with a new playbook and system in Year #2."
given that both statements are not compatible with each other, in which statement were you wrong?
Ill be waiting for your county politician response
Is this really that complicated. UW's offense looked like shit the first half of the year. Not so much the second half of the year. For someone to change their view over the course of a few months based on performance on the field seems level headed to me. Unless, of course, the goal is "gotcha".
@Tequilla Oct 2015 - "I've been saying for a while that Smith (and Pease) should be fired at end of season ... failure to do so by Petersen puts it on him and would be a fireable event in my mind"
@Tequilla Feb 2016 - "But I don't think it is indefensible to give Smith another crack with a more experienced team and not risk setting back some still young players with a new playbook and system in Year #2."
I like to say that Petersen should be fired if he doesnt get rid of Smith and then say its not indefensible to give Smith another season... that is what I like to do.
What changed? Other than the 2nd half of the season, nothing. But changing opinion based on demonstrated improvement in performanceplaying worse teams is an executable offense.
FTFY
"Tie a cement rock to the foot and throw him off [Smith] Alcatraz on the way home" to "Smith did just enough" because UW beat up on some of the worst defensive teams in the country to finish out the season.
You act like it was a surprise UW finished out the season against WSU, OSU, and some shit tier bowl team.
First 6 games, opponents record 42-35 Last 6 games, opponents record 43-35
Next.
You probably think you made a point
Let me try again, old-timer. On average, the quality of opponents at the beginning of the year was on par with the quality of opponents at the end of the year.
Screw that. Win or GTFO. Fire Peterman today.
That's not true at all
You may not want it to be true, but the facts say otherwise.
First 6 games, opponents record 42-35 Last 6 games, opponents record 43-35
I like to equate 6 games (3 P12, 2 MW, 1 Big Sky) to 6 games (6 P12). I do that.
I'm not exactly sure what you're implying here.
You would think that the offensive results should be better against 3 P12, 2 MW, and 1 Big Sky teams than against 6 P12 conference teams - agreed?
I'm implying that bisecting the season and comparing opponent's records is not a good indicator of the schedule getting easier or harder. That's because these 6 games vs 6 games is not a good comparison.
The point AZHusky is trying to make is that the schedule did not get easier at the end of the season because the opponent's records are nearly identical.
How about we divide the conference schedule into thirds?
You have excuses every time you are wrong. You are never wrong, just like Aubbie is meet wrong. I appreciate you even though I hate you as a poster and i question whether AuburnDawg is one of your two dads.
I'm wrong plenty ... anybody that thinks that they are right all (or even a vast majority) of the time is full of shit.
Now, if I don't sit there and say "I'm wrong" enough for your liking ... then tough shit. And BTW, when I do say that I was wrong, or perhaps take new information and form a new opinion, I get hit with the "moving the goalposts" crap.
I learned a long time ago that regardless of what I say or do, for whatever reason people have some kind of opinion about it. There are people that are 100% in my corner and will do anything for me. There are other people that want to take shots at me any opportunity that they get. Such is life.
Glad that you appreciate the podcast ... we try to keep it light hearted and entertaining while balancing some amount of seriousness. Delicate balance.
If you can admit that you are wrong then it shouldnt be so difficult to clear the field...
@Tequilla Oct 2015 - "I've been saying for a while that Smith (and Pease) should be fired at end of season ... failure to do so by Petersen puts it on him and would be a fireable event in my mind"
@Tequilla Feb 2016 - "But I don't think it is indefensible to give Smith another crack with a more experienced team and not risk setting back some still young players with a new playbook and system in Year #2."
given that both statements are not compatible with each other, in which statement were you wrong?
Ill be waiting for your county politician response
Is this really that complicated. UW's offense looked like shit the first half of the year. Not so much the second half of the year. For someone to change their view over the course of a few months based on performance on the field seems level headed to me. Unless, of course, the goal is "gotcha".
It's even simpler than this ...
I said early in the season that Smith was in a prove it mode and that I was learning towards firing him (if I was the Head Coach) ...
After the ASU game I said that I would have fired him (again, if I was the Head Coach) ...
This week, I also said that I would have worked my resources to see if I had a better option as a replacement that I considered a better fit and moved on (again, if I was Head Coach and as always assumes that the options that I would have had to replace would have been an upgrade).
I also said that I can understand Petersen's logic (and when combined with the above suggests that I disagree with it) given end of season performance and that the 1-year contract instead of 2 years is a fitting compromise to allow Smith to stay and prove it further.
Some idiots need to learn the difference between what I would do, what Pete does, and whether my opinion is what I would do or what I think Pete will do.
can't wait for @Tequilla to call in to the HFP and throw down with Roaddawg, who turns heel and actually sides with Teq and they then double team Jimmy.
@Gladstone: Jimmy will sleep through the whole thing. His yawning is a real downer for that show. Show up awake, or don't show up at all, Jimmy. Yawning is contagious, so if you're fine with putting your audience to sleep, have at it. But I'd rather Jimmy chug some Dew before each show.
@Tequilla Oct 2015 - "I've been saying for a while that Smith (and Pease) should be fired at end of season ... failure to do so by Petersen puts it on him and would be a fireable event in my mind"
@Tequilla Feb 2016 - "But I don't think it is indefensible to give Smith another crack with a more experienced team and not risk setting back some still young players with a new playbook and system in Year #2."
I like to say that Petersen should be fired if he doesnt get rid of Smith and then say its not indefensible to give Smith another season... that is what I like to do.
What changed? Other than the 2nd half of the season, nothing. But changing opinion based on demonstrated improvement in performanceplaying worse teams is an executable offense.
FTFY
"Tie a cement rock to the foot and throw him off [Smith] Alcatraz on the way home" to "Smith did just enough" because UW beat up on some of the worst defensive teams in the country to finish out the season.
You act like it was a surprise UW finished out the season against WSU, OSU, and some shit tier bowl team.
First 6 games, opponents record 42-35 Last 6 games, opponents record 43-35
Next.
You probably think you made a point
It's even dumber when you consider Stanford was game number 7. We got manhandled that game, but we'll use that game to show how tuff the schedule was anyways, right?
Coogs had a dream season without their QB, and a shitty Southern Miss team that had a good season in C-USA or the AAC or whatever the fuck their conference is called. If you don't think the schedule was easier late in the year, I don't know what to tell you.
The offense didn't score a point in the 2nd half against ASU. BUT THEY HAD OVER 500 YARDS! You are a dumbfuck doog if you believe that was a good offensive performance.
The offense played well against Oregon State (who cares?), above average against WSU, and pretty good against Southern Miss, who probably had the worst defense we faced besides Sacramento State and Oregon State.
The offense improved some late in the year. They finally rode Gaskin all game long and gave him more carries, which was something us dumb armchair QB's were calling for all fucking season. It's to the point that none of this fucking matters. Just beat Stanford and Oregon. Sark had some teams that ran up a lot of yards and points against shitty opponents too.
@Tequilla Oct 2015 - "I've been saying for a while that Smith (and Pease) should be fired at end of season ... failure to do so by Petersen puts it on him and would be a fireable event in my mind"
@Tequilla Feb 2016 - "But I don't think it is indefensible to give Smith another crack with a more experienced team and not risk setting back some still young players with a new playbook and system in Year #2."
I like to say that Petersen should be fired if he doesnt get rid of Smith and then say its not indefensible to give Smith another season... that is what I like to do.
What changed? Other than the 2nd half of the season, nothing. But changing opinion based on demonstrated improvement in performanceplaying worse teams is an executable offense.
FTFY
"Tie a cement rock to the foot and throw him off [Smith] Alcatraz on the way home" to "Smith did just enough" because UW beat up on some of the worst defensive teams in the country to finish out the season.
You act like it was a surprise UW finished out the season against WSU, OSU, and some shit tier bowl team.
First 6 games, opponents record 42-35 Last 6 games, opponents record 43-35
Next.
You probably think you made a point
It's even dumber when you consider Stanford was game number 7. We got manhandled that game, but we'll use that game to show how tuff the schedule was anyways, right?
Coogs had a dream season without their QB, and a shitty Southern Miss team that had a good season in C-USA or the AAC or whatever the fuck their conference is called. If you don't think the schedule was easier late in the year, I don't know what to tell you.
The offense didn't score a point in the 2nd half against ASU. BUT THEY HAD OVER 500 YARDS! You are a dumbfuck doog if you believe that was a good offensive performance.
The offense played well against Oregon State (who cares?), above average against WSU, and pretty good against Southern Miss, who probably had the worst defense we faced besides Sacramento State and Oregon State.
The offense improved some late in the year. They finally rode Gaskin all game long and gave him more carries, which was something us dumb armchair QB's were calling for all fucking season. It's to the point that none of this fucking matters. Just beat Stanford and Oregon. Sark had some teams that ran up a lot of yards and points against shitty opponents too.
POTW. Also the fact that we still need to argue this after having the same shit repeat again-and-again-and-again-and-again shows how stupid this fanbase is.
@Tequilla Oct 2015 - "I've been saying for a while that Smith (and Pease) should be fired at end of season ... failure to do so by Petersen puts it on him and would be a fireable event in my mind"
@Tequilla Feb 2016 - "But I don't think it is indefensible to give Smith another crack with a more experienced team and not risk setting back some still young players with a new playbook and system in Year #2."
I like to say that Petersen should be fired if he doesnt get rid of Smith and then say its not indefensible to give Smith another season... that is what I like to do.
What changed? Other than the 2nd half of the season, nothing. But changing opinion based on demonstrated improvement in performanceplaying worse teams is an executable offense.
FTFY
"Tie a cement rock to the foot and throw him off [Smith] Alcatraz on the way home" to "Smith did just enough" because UW beat up on some of the worst defensive teams in the country to finish out the season.
You act like it was a surprise UW finished out the season against WSU, OSU, and some shit tier bowl team.
First 6 games, opponents record 42-35 Last 6 games, opponents record 43-35
Next.
You probably think you made a point
It's even dumber when you consider Stanford was game number 7. We got manhandled that game, but we'll use that game to show how tuff the schedule was anyways, right?
Coogs had a dream season without their QB, and a shitty Southern Miss team that had a good season in C-USA or the AAC or whatever the fuck their conference is called. If you don't think the schedule was easier late in the year, I don't know what to tell you.
The offense didn't score a point in the 2nd half against ASU. BUT THEY HAD OVER 500 YARDS! You are a dumbfuck doog if you believe that was a good offensive performance.
The offense played well against Oregon State (who cares?), above average against WSU, and pretty good against Southern Miss, who probably had the worst defense we faced besides Sacramento State and Oregon State.
The offense improved some late in the year. They finally rode Gaskin all game long and gave him more carries, which was something us dumb armchair QB's were calling for all fucking season. It's to the point that none of this fucking matters. Just beat Stanford and Oregon. Sark had some teams that ran up a lot of yards and points against shitty opponents too.
You just cant expect to field an offense as good as the best play caller in america... Certainly not in THIS economy
@Tequilla Oct 2015 - "I've been saying for a while that Smith (and Pease) should be fired at end of season ... failure to do so by Petersen puts it on him and would be a fireable event in my mind"
@Tequilla Feb 2016 - "But I don't think it is indefensible to give Smith another crack with a more experienced team and not risk setting back some still young players with a new playbook and system in Year #2."
I like to say that Petersen should be fired if he doesnt get rid of Smith and then say its not indefensible to give Smith another season... that is what I like to do.
What changed? Other than the 2nd half of the season, nothing. But changing opinion based on demonstrated improvement in performanceplaying worse teams is an executable offense.
FTFY
"Tie a cement rock to the foot and throw him off [Smith] Alcatraz on the way home" to "Smith did just enough" because UW beat up on some of the worst defensive teams in the country to finish out the season.
You act like it was a surprise UW finished out the season against WSU, OSU, and some shit tier bowl team.
First 6 games, opponents record 42-35 Last 6 games, opponents record 43-35
Next.
You probably think you made a point
It's even dumber when you consider Stanford was game number 7. We got manhandled that game, but we'll use that game to show how tuff the schedule was anyways, right?
Coogs had a dream season without their QB, and a shitty Southern Miss team that had a good season in C-USA or the AAC or whatever the fuck their conference is called. If you don't think the schedule was easier late in the year, I don't know what to tell you.
The offense didn't score a point in the 2nd half against ASU. BUT THEY HAD OVER 500 YARDS! You are a dumbfuck doog if you believe that was a good offensive performance.
The offense played well against Oregon State (who cares?), above average against WSU, and pretty good against Southern Miss, who probably had the worst defense we faced besides Sacramento State and Oregon State.
The offense improved some late in the year. They finally rode Gaskin all game long and gave him more carries, which was something us dumb armchair QB's were calling for all fucking season. It's to the point that none of this fucking matters. Just beat Stanford and Oregon. Sark had some teams that ran up a lot of yards and points against shitty opponents too.
POTW. Also the fact that we still need to argue this after having the same shit repeat again-and-again-and-again-and-again shows how stupid this fanbase is.
The offense looked more succinct and experienced once the young players gained more experience. That doesn't mean Smith still doesn't suck.
This is pretty much exactly where I fall in the discussion.
Offense looks better because the players are better. 81% likelihood that Smith really sucks. But at the same time he's also worked with a shit sandwich for close to 81% of his tenure at UW.
I personally would still make a move but I can understand the reasoning to give him one last year to prove it.
Tie a cement rock to the foot and throw him off Alcatraz on the way home ...
If Petersen needs any more proof to fire this clown, the first half + first drive of the second half should have broke the camel's back ...
Enough said on that and this game ...
I've been saying for a while that Smith (and Pease) should be fired at end of season ... failure to do so by Petersen puts it on him and would be a fireable event in my mind
Fireable event? New most fucktarded post of young new year, maybe of all time. Congrats buttfuck!
Do you even know how the quote function works?
Dont have or need to bold cute little quotes. When puppy speaks people listen no matter if I choose to exercise the quote function properly. Generally i have my hot aids do my posting anyway offseason, i just fly in during spring, fall and during the season.
Hit it up with them, although dont expect them to give you garboons the time of day. (Kind of like all the cute girls who've ignored you your whole life doginlynnwood.) You'll catch on after your 9th grade english interpretation pass/fail class ends. You'll learn semantics and proper quoting are as insignificant as your paycheck.
Tie a cement rock to the foot and throw him off Alcatraz on the way home ...
If Petersen needs any more proof to fire this clown, the first half + first drive of the second half should have broke the camel's back ...
Enough said on that and this game ...
I've been saying for a while that Smith (and Pease) should be fired at end of season ... failure to do so by Petersen puts it on him and would be a fireable event in my mind
Fireable event? New most fucktarded post of young new year, maybe of all time. Congrats buttfuck!
Do you even know how the quote function works?
Dont have or need to bold cute little quotes. When puppy speaks people listen no matter if I choose to exercise the quote function properly. Generally i have my hot aids do my posting anyway offseason, i just fly in during spring, fall and during the season.
Hit it up with them, although dont expect them to give you garboons the time of day. (Kind of like all the cute girls who've ignored you your whole life doginlynnwood.) You'll catch on after your 9th grade english interpretation pass/fail class ends. You'll learn semantics and proper quoting are as insignificant as your paycheck.
@Tequilla Oct 2015 - "I've been saying for a while that Smith (and Pease) should be fired at end of season ... failure to do so by Petersen puts it on him and would be a fireable event in my mind"
@Tequilla Feb 2016 - "But I don't think it is indefensible to give Smith another crack with a more experienced team and not risk setting back some still young players with a new playbook and system in Year #2."
I like to say that Petersen should be fired if he doesnt get rid of Smith and then say its not indefensible to give Smith another season... that is what I like to do.
What changed? Other than the 2nd half of the season, nothing. But changing opinion based on demonstrated improvement in performanceplaying worse teams is an executable offense.
FTFY
"Tie a cement rock to the foot and throw him off [Smith] Alcatraz on the way home" to "Smith did just enough" because UW beat up on some of the worst defensive teams in the country to finish out the season.
You act like it was a surprise UW finished out the season against WSU, OSU, and some shit tier bowl team.
First 6 games, opponents record 42-35 Last 6 games, opponents record 43-35
Next.
You probably think you made a point
Let me try again, old-timer. On average, the quality of opponents at the beginning of the year was on par with the quality of opponents at the end of the year.
Screw that. Win or GTFO. Fire Peterman today.
That's not true at all
You may not want it to be true, but the facts say otherwise.
First 6 games, opponents record 42-35 Last 6 games, opponents record 43-35
I like to equate 6 games (3 P12, 2 MW, 1 Big Sky) to 6 games (6 P12). I do that.
I'm not exactly sure what you're implying here.
You would think that the offensive results should be better against 3 P12, 2 MW, and 1 Big Sky teams than against 6 P12 conference teams - agreed?
I'm implying that bisecting the season and comparing opponent's records is not a good indicator of the schedule getting easier or harder. That's because these 6 games vs 6 games is not a good comparison.
The point AZHusky is trying to make is that the schedule did not get easier at the end of the season because the opponent's records are nearly identical.
How about we divide the conference schedule into thirds?
You have excuses every time you are wrong. You are never wrong, just like Aubbie is meet wrong. I appreciate you even though I hate you as a poster and i question whether AuburnDawg is one of your two dads.
I'm wrong plenty ... anybody that thinks that they are right all (or even a vast majority) of the time is full of shit.
Now, if I don't sit there and say "I'm wrong" enough for your liking ... then tough shit. And BTW, when I do say that I was wrong, or perhaps take new information and form a new opinion, I get hit with the "moving the goalposts" crap.
I learned a long time ago that regardless of what I say or do, for whatever reason people have some kind of opinion about it. There are people that are 100% in my corner and will do anything for me. There are other people that want to take shots at me any opportunity that they get. Such is life.
Glad that you appreciate the podcast ... we try to keep it light hearted and entertaining while balancing some amount of seriousness. Delicate balance.
If you can admit that you are wrong then it shouldnt be so difficult to clear the field...
@Tequilla Oct 2015 - "I've been saying for a while that Smith (and Pease) should be fired at end of season ... failure to do so by Petersen puts it on him and would be a fireable event in my mind"
@Tequilla Feb 2016 - "But I don't think it is indefensible to give Smith another crack with a more experienced team and not risk setting back some still young players with a new playbook and system in Year #2."
given that both statements are not compatible with each other, in which statement were you wrong?
Ill be waiting for your county politician response
Is this really that complicated. UW's offense looked like shit the first half of the year. Not so much the second half of the year. For someone to change their view over the course of a few months based on performance on the field seems level headed to me. Unless, of course, the goal is "gotcha".
It's even simpler than this ...
I said early in the season that Smith was in a prove it mode and that I was learning towards firing him (if I was the Head Coach) ...
After the ASU game I said that I would have fired him (again, if I was the Head Coach) ...
This week, I also said that I would have worked my resources to see if I had a better option as a replacement that I considered a better fit and moved on (again, if I was Head Coach and as always assumes that the options that I would have had to replace would have been an upgrade).
I also said that I can understand Petersen's logic (and when combined with the above suggests that I disagree with it) given end of season performance and that the 1-year contract instead of 2 years is a fitting compromise to allow Smith to stay and prove it further.
Some idiots need to learn the difference between what I would do, what Pete does, and whether my opinion is what I would do or what I think Pete will do.
I went to a Jesuit school between my UW experiences. They have a good basketball team. They made me take a lot of logic, discourse, and philosophy courses. I'm actually kind of good at that stuff. And I have no fucking idea what you just said here.
@Tequilla Oct 2015 - "I've been saying for a while that Smith (and Pease) should be fired at end of season ... failure to do so by Petersen puts it on him and would be a fireable event in my mind"
@Tequilla Feb 2016 - "But I don't think it is indefensible to give Smith another crack with a more experienced team and not risk setting back some still young players with a new playbook and system in Year #2."
I like to say that Petersen should be fired if he doesnt get rid of Smith and then say its not indefensible to give Smith another season... that is what I like to do.
What changed? Other than the 2nd half of the season, nothing. But changing opinion based on demonstrated improvement in performanceplaying worse teams is an executable offense.
FTFY
"Tie a cement rock to the foot and throw him off [Smith] Alcatraz on the way home" to "Smith did just enough" because UW beat up on some of the worst defensive teams in the country to finish out the season.
You act like it was a surprise UW finished out the season against WSU, OSU, and some shit tier bowl team.
First 6 games, opponents record 42-35 Last 6 games, opponents record 43-35
Next.
You probably think you made a point
Let me try again, old-timer. On average, the quality of opponents at the beginning of the year was on par with the quality of opponents at the end of the year.
Screw that. Win or GTFO. Fire Peterman today.
That's not true at all
You may not want it to be true, but the facts say otherwise.
First 6 games, opponents record 42-35 Last 6 games, opponents record 43-35
I like to equate 6 games (3 P12, 2 MW, 1 Big Sky) to 6 games (6 P12). I do that.
I'm not exactly sure what you're implying here.
You would think that the offensive results should be better against 3 P12, 2 MW, and 1 Big Sky teams than against 6 P12 conference teams - agreed?
I'm implying that bisecting the season and comparing opponent's records is not a good indicator of the schedule getting easier or harder. That's because these 6 games vs 6 games is not a good comparison.
The point AZHusky is trying to make is that the schedule did not get easier at the end of the season because the opponent's records are nearly identical.
How about we divide the conference schedule into thirds?
You have excuses every time you are wrong. You are never wrong, just like Aubbie is meet wrong. I appreciate you even though I hate you as a poster and i question whether AuburnDawg is one of your two dads.
I'm wrong plenty ... anybody that thinks that they are right all (or even a vast majority) of the time is full of shit.
Now, if I don't sit there and say "I'm wrong" enough for your liking ... then tough shit. And BTW, when I do say that I was wrong, or perhaps take new information and form a new opinion, I get hit with the "moving the goalposts" crap.
I learned a long time ago that regardless of what I say or do, for whatever reason people have some kind of opinion about it. There are people that are 100% in my corner and will do anything for me. There are other people that want to take shots at me any opportunity that they get. Such is life.
Glad that you appreciate the podcast ... we try to keep it light hearted and entertaining while balancing some amount of seriousness. Delicate balance.
If you can admit that you are wrong then it shouldnt be so difficult to clear the field...
@Tequilla Oct 2015 - "I've been saying for a while that Smith (and Pease) should be fired at end of season ... failure to do so by Petersen puts it on him and would be a fireable event in my mind"
@Tequilla Feb 2016 - "But I don't think it is indefensible to give Smith another crack with a more experienced team and not risk setting back some still young players with a new playbook and system in Year #2."
given that both statements are not compatible with each other, in which statement were you wrong?
Ill be waiting for your county politician response
Is this really that complicated. UW's offense looked like shit the first half of the year. Not so much the second half of the year. For someone to change their view over the course of a few months based on performance on the field seems level headed to me. Unless, of course, the goal is "gotcha".
It's even simpler than this ...
I said early in the season that Smith was in a prove it mode and that I was learning towards firing him (if I was the Head Coach) ...
After the ASU game I said that I would have fired him (again, if I was the Head Coach) ...
This week, I also said that I would have worked my resources to see if I had a better option as a replacement that I considered a better fit and moved on (again, if I was Head Coach and as always assumes that the options that I would have had to replace would have been an upgrade).
I also said that I can understand Petersen's logic (and when combined with the above suggests that I disagree with it) given end of season performance and that the 1-year contract instead of 2 years is a fitting compromise to allow Smith to stay and prove it further.
Some idiots need to learn the difference between what I would do, what Pete does, and whether my opinion is what I would do or what I think Pete will do.
I went to a Jesuit school between my UW experiences. They have a good basketball team. They made me take a lot of logic, discourse, and philosophy courses. I'm actually kind of good at that stuff. And I have no fucking idea what you just said here.
Comments
The Stanford game I'm not sure is really relevant because all that game proved was that Magna Carta was nowhere close to ready for PAC play.
Personally, I'm not entirely sure that I buy the schedule was easier/harder or whatever argument to begin with. I think it has way more to do with the fact that the youth on offense whether it was Browning, Gaskin, or the OL got more of their feet under them and started producing.
The argument that the production was tied to shitty defenses really doesn't resonate with me as well. Utah had arguably the 2nd best defense in the conference. Poor defenses that we struggled with in the first half of the season (Cal and Oregon) we didn't struggle with in the 2nd half of the season (Arizona schools).
@Tequilla Oct 2015 - "I've been saying for a while that Smith (and Pease) should be fired at end of season ... failure to do so by Petersen puts it on him and would be a fireable event in my mind"
@Tequilla Feb 2016 - "But I don't think it is indefensible to give Smith another crack with a more experienced team and not risk setting back some still young players with a new playbook and system in Year #2."
given that both statements are not compatible with each other, in which statement were you wrong?
Ill be waiting for your county politician response
Can we nuke this thread?
I said early in the season that Smith was in a prove it mode and that I was learning towards firing him (if I was the Head Coach) ...
After the ASU game I said that I would have fired him (again, if I was the Head Coach) ...
This week, I also said that I would have worked my resources to see if I had a better option as a replacement that I considered a better fit and moved on (again, if I was Head Coach and as always assumes that the options that I would have had to replace would have been an upgrade).
I also said that I can understand Petersen's logic (and when combined with the above suggests that I disagree with it) given end of season performance and that the 1-year contract instead of 2 years is a fitting compromise to allow Smith to stay and prove it further.
Some idiots need to learn the difference between what I would do, what Pete does, and whether my opinion is what I would do or what I think Pete will do.
Coogs had a dream season without their QB, and a shitty Southern Miss team that had a good season in C-USA or the AAC or whatever the fuck their conference is called. If you don't think the schedule was easier late in the year, I don't know what to tell you.
The offense didn't score a point in the 2nd half against ASU. BUT THEY HAD OVER 500 YARDS! You are a dumbfuck doog if you believe that was a good offensive performance.
The offense played well against Oregon State (who cares?), above average against WSU, and pretty good against Southern Miss, who probably had the worst defense we faced besides Sacramento State and Oregon State.
The offense improved some late in the year. They finally rode Gaskin all game long and gave him more carries, which was something us dumb armchair QB's were calling for all fucking season. It's to the point that none of this fucking matters. Just beat Stanford and Oregon. Sark had some teams that ran up a lot of yards and points against shitty opponents too.
Offense looks better because the players are better. 81% likelihood that Smith really sucks. But at the same time he's also worked with a shit sandwich for close to 81% of his tenure at UW.
I personally would still make a move but I can understand the reasoning to give him one last year to prove it.
Hit it up with them, although dont expect them to give you garboons the time of day. (Kind of like all the cute girls who've ignored you your whole life doginlynnwood.) You'll catch on after your 9th grade english interpretation pass/fail class ends. You'll learn semantics and proper quoting are as insignificant as your paycheck.