I don't think that the writer had a single tangible thought in the entire article ...
For those that use the whole "what was the program before Romar" argument in looking at relevance ... how many people are showing up to watch the games now? In other words, they aren't relevant now. So what Romar has really done is taken a program from irrelevant, made it somewhat relevant, pushed his chips into the middle for one and done guys, failed, and now has turned the program relatively irrelevant again.
Sounds like Petersen, minus the "somewhat relevant" moment...
And just in the event you're being half serious, CP has put more guys in the nfl than most elite programs and actually won more BCS games than 95% of elite top 5 conference programs. I'll be the first to say I have no fucing clue if he makes it at UW, but to even place romar on CP's level is an embarrassment to CP. At least he has taken a lot less talent, made it better and actually won games. Where as Romar has taken far superior talent, middled or worse, and won nothing resembling a big game in his career.
Romar has put a lot of players into the NBA relative to most power 5 programs. Now you are saying having had NFL talent makes Pete good. But that was listed earlier as a reason why Romar sucks. Can't have it both ways.
Nobody fucking cares what Pete did at Boise junior college anymore. So far he is a total failure at UW. However, Romar has had some highlights at the Pac-12 level (conference championships, tournament runs). Levels of success Pete hasn't even sniffed while coaching at the big boy table.
That is pretty fucking sad when you think about it. Romar is better than Petersen. And Romar should be coaching at some private 1A church high school at best.
But, as always, I support coach Romar.
So you're killing Petersen after 25 months and two seasons, albeit disappointing seasons, but Romar, who hasn't made a tournament in five years is better somehow?
At least give Petersen next year before you start putting him under fucking Romar. If he's 6-6 and in some crap bowl again, fine. He's definitely another Boise CC fraud. Romar has done less with more than any other Pac 12 coach I can think of....maybe Lavin is close...and I've been watching the conference since 1987 or so.
There's more good than bad with what Pete has done ... he hasn't been perfect the last 2 years for sure. He could have perhaps won a few more games by compromising his long term vision. In the end, does it really matter given the last 2 years weren't conference winning caliber teams given the QB play?
Depends
If there are more 7-5 or 8-4 seasons, I'll hold it against him.
If they start beating Oregon and at least winning the North, I won't.
@Throbber: I'm not following you. I'm familiar with the Tony Wroten situation, transfers, faux transfers, etc. But if you're alleging cash-in-cups, do tell. I don't know about that. But shit man, this thread's about Romar. Why hijack it & make it about Garfield? I'm sure there'll be threads on that stuff shortly.
Everybody likes Starbucks cups in AAU.
And you are correct. Now that Bellevue is out in the light of day, Garfield most deservedly is in the que. After Beach.
You sound bitter.
Shoulda been a Viking!
I place too much emphasis on certain life skills like reading to have been a Viking.
I don't think that the writer had a single tangible thought in the entire article ...
For those that use the whole "what was the program before Romar" argument in looking at relevance ... how many people are showing up to watch the games now? In other words, they aren't relevant now. So what Romar has really done is taken a program from irrelevant, made it somewhat relevant, pushed his chips into the middle for one and done guys, failed, and now has turned the program relatively irrelevant again.
Sounds like Petersen, minus the "somewhat relevant" moment...
And just in the event you're being half serious, CP has put more guys in the nfl than most elite programs and actually won more BCS games than 95% of elite top 5 conference programs. I'll be the first to say I have no fucing clue if he makes it at UW, but to even place romar on CP's level is an embarrassment to CP. At least he has taken a lot less talent, made it better and actually won games. Where as Romar has taken far superior talent, middled or worse, and won nothing resembling a big game in his career.
Romar has put a lot of players into the NBA relative to most power 5 programs. Now you are saying having had NFL talent makes Pete good. But that was listed earlier as a reason why Romar sucks. Can't have it both ways.
Nobody fucking cares what Pete did at Boise junior college anymore. So far he is a total failure at UW. However, Romar has had some highlights at the Pac-12 level (conference championships, tournament runs). Levels of success Pete hasn't even sniffed while coaching at the big boy table.
That is pretty fucking sad when you think about it. Romar is better than Petersen. And Romar should be coaching at some private 1A church high school at best.
But, as always, I support coach Romar.
So you're killing Petersen after 25 months and two seasons, albeit disappointing seasons, but Romar, who hasn't made a tournament in five years is better somehow?
At least give Petersen next year before you start putting him under fucking Romar. If he's 6-6 and in some crap bowl again, fine. He's definitely another Boise CC fraud. Romar has done less with more than any other Pac 12 coach I can think of....maybe Lavin is close...and I've been watching the conference since 1987 or so.
Romar's failures are numerous and well documented.
And yet Romar's accomplishments far outshine Petersen's.
I don't think that the writer had a single tangible thought in the entire article ...
For those that use the whole "what was the program before Romar" argument in looking at relevance ... how many people are showing up to watch the games now? In other words, they aren't relevant now. So what Romar has really done is taken a program from irrelevant, made it somewhat relevant, pushed his chips into the middle for one and done guys, failed, and now has turned the program relatively irrelevant again.
Sounds like Petersen, minus the "somewhat relevant" moment...
And just in the event you're being half serious, CP has put more guys in the nfl than most elite programs and actually won more BCS games than 95% of elite top 5 conference programs. I'll be the first to say I have no fucing clue if he makes it at UW, but to even place romar on CP's level is an embarrassment to CP. At least he has taken a lot less talent, made it better and actually won games. Where as Romar has taken far superior talent, middled or worse, and won nothing resembling a big game in his career.
Romar has put a lot of players into the NBA relative to most power 5 programs. Now you are saying having had NFL talent makes Pete good. But that was listed earlier as a reason why Romar sucks. Can't have it both ways.
Nobody fucking cares what Pete did at Boise junior college anymore. So far he is a total failure at UW. However, Romar has had some highlights at the Pac-12 level (conference championships, tournament runs). Levels of success Pete hasn't even sniffed while coaching at the big boy table.
That is pretty fucking sad when you think about it. Romar is better than Petersen. And Romar should be coaching at some private 1A church high school at best.
But, as always, I support coach Romar.
Jesus Christ you're dumb.
Ok, answer a simple question: what is Petersen's biggest accomplishment at UW thus far?
I don't think that the writer had a single tangible thought in the entire article ...
For those that use the whole "what was the program before Romar" argument in looking at relevance ... how many people are showing up to watch the games now? In other words, they aren't relevant now. So what Romar has really done is taken a program from irrelevant, made it somewhat relevant, pushed his chips into the middle for one and done guys, failed, and now has turned the program relatively irrelevant again.
Sounds like Petersen, minus the "somewhat relevant" moment...
And just in the event you're being half serious, CP has put more guys in the nfl than most elite programs and actually won more BCS games than 95% of elite top 5 conference programs. I'll be the first to say I have no fucing clue if he makes it at UW, but to even place romar on CP's level is an embarrassment to CP. At least he has taken a lot less talent, made it better and actually won games. Where as Romar has taken far superior talent, middled or worse, and won nothing resembling a big game in his career.
Romar has put a lot of players into the NBA relative to most power 5 programs. Now you are saying having had NFL talent makes Pete good. But that was listed earlier as a reason why Romar sucks. Can't have it both ways.
Nobody fucking cares what Pete did at Boise junior college anymore. So far he is a total failure at UW. However, Romar has had some highlights at the Pac-12 level (conference championships, tournament runs). Levels of success Pete hasn't even sniffed while coaching at the big boy table.
That is pretty fucking sad when you think about it. Romar is better than Petersen. And Romar should be coaching at some private 1A church high school at best.
But, as always, I support coach Romar.
So you're killing Petersen after 25 months and two seasons, albeit disappointing seasons, but Romar, who hasn't made a tournament in five years is better somehow?
At least give Petersen next year before you start putting him under fucking Romar. If he's 6-6 and in some crap bowl again, fine. He's definitely another Boise CC fraud. Romar has done less with more than any other Pac 12 coach I can think of....maybe Lavin is close...and I've been watching the conference since 1987 or so.
Romar's failures are numerous and well documented.
And yet Romar's accomplishments far outshine Petersen's.
Since you've already arbitrarily decided that Petersen's entire Boise tenure, which includes two BCS Bowl wins (and are clearly better accomplishments than any of Romar's S16 appearances), don't count, you've now been left with comparing the accomplishments of two years of a football program to 13 years of a basketball program. It takes a special kind of idiot to actually try to turn that into a meaningful comparison. But knock yourself out.
If Petersen wins 4-5 conference games next year, he should be fired
If he competes for, and wins the PAC North next year, the entire argument as to whether he's the right guy for this program at this time should vanish.
The other argument that is completely fucktarded to me is the whole well if you hand the ball off earlier in the year more you might have got another win or two like it is a linear argument. This year was all about developing players and the team. If you can't see that the development of this team, and in particular offensively, grew as the year went on, then you just flat out aren't paying attention.
I don't think that the writer had a single tangible thought in the entire article ...
For those that use the whole "what was the program before Romar" argument in looking at relevance ... how many people are showing up to watch the games now? In other words, they aren't relevant now. So what Romar has really done is taken a program from irrelevant, made it somewhat relevant, pushed his chips into the middle for one and done guys, failed, and now has turned the program relatively irrelevant again.
Sounds like Petersen, minus the "somewhat relevant" moment...
And just in the event you're being half serious, CP has put more guys in the nfl than most elite programs and actually won more BCS games than 95% of elite top 5 conference programs. I'll be the first to say I have no fucing clue if he makes it at UW, but to even place romar on CP's level is an embarrassment to CP. At least he has taken a lot less talent, made it better and actually won games. Where as Romar has taken far superior talent, middled or worse, and won nothing resembling a big game in his career.
Romar has put a lot of players into the NBA relative to most power 5 programs. Now you are saying having had NFL talent makes Pete good. But that was listed earlier as a reason why Romar sucks. Can't have it both ways.
Nobody fucking cares what Pete did at Boise junior college anymore. So far he is a total failure at UW. However, Romar has had some highlights at the Pac-12 level (conference championships, tournament runs). Levels of success Pete hasn't even sniffed while coaching at the big boy table.
That is pretty fucking sad when you think about it. Romar is better than Petersen. And Romar should be coaching at some private 1A church high school at best.
But, as always, I support coach Romar.
So you're killing Petersen after 25 months and two seasons, albeit disappointing seasons, but Romar, who hasn't made a tournament in five years is better somehow?
At least give Petersen next year before you start putting him under fucking Romar. If he's 6-6 and in some crap bowl again, fine. He's definitely another Boise CC fraud. Romar has done less with more than any other Pac 12 coach I can think of....maybe Lavin is close...and I've been watching the conference since 1987 or so.
Romar's failures are numerous and well documented.
And yet Romar's accomplishments far outshine Petersen's.
Since you've already arbitrarily decided that Petersen's entire Boise tenure, which includes two BCS Bowl wins (and are clearly better accomplishments than any of Romar's S16 appearances), don't count, you've now been left with comparing the accomplishments of two years of a football program to 13 years of a basketball program. It takes a special kind of idiot to actually try to turn that into a meaningful comparison. But knock yourself out.
I'm not a Boise St fan. Why would I give a fuck about Petersen's Boise W/L record or BCS bowls anymore? Those things got him the UW job, that's all they're good for. They're meaningless to us now that he is here.
Do you see me saying Romar gets credit for winning a Natty at UCLA? Fuck no.
If Petersen wins the conference next year he will be on Romar's level (champ in year 3). But do you honestly see that happening?
If Petersen wins 4-5 conference games next year, he should be fired
If he competes for, and wins the PAC North next year, the entire argument as to whether he's the right guy for this program at this time should vanish.
The other argument that is completely fucktarded to me is the whole well if you hand the ball off earlier in the year more you might have got another win or two like it is a linear argument. This year was all about developing players and the team. If you can't see that the development of this team, and in particular offensively, grew as the year went on, then you just flat out aren't paying attention.
It's more than likely that he goes 4-5 next year or maybe a game better. He sucks.
You think we're beating Oregon and Stanford next year? I don't.
If Petersen wins 4-5 conference games next year, he should be fired
If he competes for, and wins the PAC North next year, the entire argument as to whether he's the right guy for this program at this time should vanish.
The other argument that is completely fucktarded to me is the whole well if you hand the ball off earlier in the year more you might have got another win or two like it is a linear argument. This year was all about developing players and the team. If you can't see that the development of this team, and in particular offensively, grew as the year went on, then you just flat out aren't paying attention.
It's more than likely that he goes 4-5 next year or maybe a game better. He sucks.
You think we're beating Oregon and Stanford next year? I don't.
I would be surprised if we didn't beat at least one of them
If Petersen wins 4-5 conference games next year, he should be fired
If he competes for, and wins the PAC North next year, the entire argument as to whether he's the right guy for this program at this time should vanish.
The other argument that is completely fucktarded to me is the whole well if you hand the ball off earlier in the year more you might have got another win or two like it is a linear argument. This year was all about developing players and the team. If you can't see that the development of this team, and in particular offensively, grew as the year went on, then you just flat out aren't paying attention.
It's more than likely that he goes 4-5 next year or maybe a game better. He sucks.
You think we're beating Oregon and Stanford next year? I don't.
We? can lose to those two and still go 6-3 or 7-2. IMO anything less than 10 wins is unacceptable. If he only wins 6 conference games he needs to sweep the non con and win the bowel game to get there.
I don't think that the writer had a single tangible thought in the entire article ...
For those that use the whole "what was the program before Romar" argument in looking at relevance ... how many people are showing up to watch the games now? In other words, they aren't relevant now. So what Romar has really done is taken a program from irrelevant, made it somewhat relevant, pushed his chips into the middle for one and done guys, failed, and now has turned the program relatively irrelevant again.
Sounds like Petersen, minus the "somewhat relevant" moment...
And just in the event you're being half serious, CP has put more guys in the nfl than most elite programs and actually won more BCS games than 95% of elite top 5 conference programs. I'll be the first to say I have no fucing clue if he makes it at UW, but to even place romar on CP's level is an embarrassment to CP. At least he has taken a lot less talent, made it better and actually won games. Where as Romar has taken far superior talent, middled or worse, and won nothing resembling a big game in his career.
Romar has put a lot of players into the NBA relative to most power 5 programs. Now you are saying having had NFL talent makes Pete good. But that was listed earlier as a reason why Romar sucks. Can't have it both ways.
Nobody fucking cares what Pete did at Boise junior college anymore. So far he is a total failure at UW. However, Romar has had some highlights at the Pac-12 level (conference championships, tournament runs). Levels of success Pete hasn't even sniffed while coaching at the big boy table.
That is pretty fucking sad when you think about it. Romar is better than Petersen. And Romar should be coaching at some private 1A church high school at best.
But, as always, I support coach Romar.
So you're killing Petersen after 25 months and two seasons, albeit disappointing seasons, but Romar, who hasn't made a tournament in five years is better somehow?
At least give Petersen next year before you start putting him under fucking Romar. If he's 6-6 and in some crap bowl again, fine. He's definitely another Boise CC fraud. Romar has done less with more than any other Pac 12 coach I can think of....maybe Lavin is close...and I've been watching the conference since 1987 or so.
Romar's failures are numerous and well documented.
And yet Romar's accomplishments far outshine Petersen's.
Since you've already arbitrarily decided that Petersen's entire Boise tenure, which includes two BCS Bowl wins (and are clearly better accomplishments than any of Romar's S16 appearances), don't count, you've now been left with comparing the accomplishments of two years of a football program to 13 years of a basketball program. It takes a special kind of idiot to actually try to turn that into a meaningful comparison. But knock yourself out.
I'm not a Boise St fan. Why would I give a fuck about Petersen's Boise W/L record or BCS bowls anymore? Those things got him the UW job, that's all they're good for. They're meaningless to us now that he is here.
Do you see me saying Romar gets credit for winning a Natty at UCLA? Fuck no.
If Petersen wins the conference next year he will be on Romar's level (champ in year 3). But do you honestly see that happening?
I don't.
So like I said, you're choosing to compare two years of a football program to 13 years of a basketball program. Fucking stupid doesn't even begin to describe your argument. You might as well be comparing Petersen's short tenure here to Bill Clinton's presidency.
I don't think that the writer had a single tangible thought in the entire article ...
For those that use the whole "what was the program before Romar" argument in looking at relevance ... how many people are showing up to watch the games now? In other words, they aren't relevant now. So what Romar has really done is taken a program from irrelevant, made it somewhat relevant, pushed his chips into the middle for one and done guys, failed, and now has turned the program relatively irrelevant again.
Sounds like Petersen, minus the "somewhat relevant" moment...
And just in the event you're being half serious, CP has put more guys in the nfl than most elite programs and actually won more BCS games than 95% of elite top 5 conference programs. I'll be the first to say I have no fucing clue if he makes it at UW, but to even place romar on CP's level is an embarrassment to CP. At least he has taken a lot less talent, made it better and actually won games. Where as Romar has taken far superior talent, middled or worse, and won nothing resembling a big game in his career.
Romar has put a lot of players into the NBA relative to most power 5 programs. Now you are saying having had NFL talent makes Pete good. But that was listed earlier as a reason why Romar sucks. Can't have it both ways.
Nobody fucking cares what Pete did at Boise junior college anymore. So far he is a total failure at UW. However, Romar has had some highlights at the Pac-12 level (conference championships, tournament runs). Levels of success Pete hasn't even sniffed while coaching at the big boy table.
That is pretty fucking sad when you think about it. Romar is better than Petersen. And Romar should be coaching at some private 1A church high school at best.
But, as always, I support coach Romar.
So you're killing Petersen after 25 months and two seasons, albeit disappointing seasons, but Romar, who hasn't made a tournament in five years is better somehow?
At least give Petersen next year before you start putting him under fucking Romar. If he's 6-6 and in some crap bowl again, fine. He's definitely another Boise CC fraud. Romar has done less with more than any other Pac 12 coach I can think of....maybe Lavin is close...and I've been watching the conference since 1987 or so.
Romar's failures are numerous and well documented.
And yet Romar's accomplishments far outshine Petersen's.
Since you've already arbitrarily decided that Petersen's entire Boise tenure, which includes two BCS Bowl wins (and are clearly better accomplishments than any of Romar's S16 appearances), don't count, you've now been left with comparing the accomplishments of two years of a football program to 13 years of a basketball program. It takes a special kind of idiot to actually try to turn that into a meaningful comparison. But knock yourself out.
I'm not a Boise St fan. Why would I give a fuck about Petersen's Boise W/L record or BCS bowls anymore? Those things got him the UW job, that's all they're good for. They're meaningless to us now that he is here.
Do you see me saying Romar gets credit for winning a Natty at UCLA? Fuck no.
If Petersen wins the conference next year he will be on Romar's level (champ in year 3). But do you honestly see that happening?
I don't.
So like I said, you're choosing to compare two years of a football program to 13 years of a basketball program. Fucking stupid doesn't even begin to describe your argument. You might as well be comparing Petersen's short tenure here to Bill Clinton's presidency.
WTF???
Romar won the conference year 3.
Can Petersen match that??? Not fucking likely.
Fucking stupid doesn't even begin to describe your ability to follow a thread.
I don't think that the writer had a single tangible thought in the entire article ...
For those that use the whole "what was the program before Romar" argument in looking at relevance ... how many people are showing up to watch the games now? In other words, they aren't relevant now. So what Romar has really done is taken a program from irrelevant, made it somewhat relevant, pushed his chips into the middle for one and done guys, failed, and now has turned the program relatively irrelevant again.
Sounds like Petersen, minus the "somewhat relevant" moment...
And just in the event you're being half serious, CP has put more guys in the nfl than most elite programs and actually won more BCS games than 95% of elite top 5 conference programs. I'll be the first to say I have no fucing clue if he makes it at UW, but to even place romar on CP's level is an embarrassment to CP. At least he has taken a lot less talent, made it better and actually won games. Where as Romar has taken far superior talent, middled or worse, and won nothing resembling a big game in his career.
Romar has put a lot of players into the NBA relative to most power 5 programs. Now you are saying having had NFL talent makes Pete good. But that was listed earlier as a reason why Romar sucks. Can't have it both ways.
Nobody fucking cares what Pete did at Boise junior college anymore. So far he is a total failure at UW. However, Romar has had some highlights at the Pac-12 level (conference championships, tournament runs). Levels of success Pete hasn't even sniffed while coaching at the big boy table.
That is pretty fucking sad when you think about it. Romar is better than Petersen. And Romar should be coaching at some private 1A church high school at best.
But, as always, I support coach Romar.
Jesus Christ you're dumb.
Ok, answer a simple question: what is Petersen's biggest accomplishment at UW thus far?
Having a team whose defense would have won 10 or 11 games if their offense would have been even slightly below average by the video game numbers that are put up in Arena Foot.... oops I meant college football.
I don't think that the writer had a single tangible thought in the entire article ...
For those that use the whole "what was the program before Romar" argument in looking at relevance ... how many people are showing up to watch the games now? In other words, they aren't relevant now. So what Romar has really done is taken a program from irrelevant, made it somewhat relevant, pushed his chips into the middle for one and done guys, failed, and now has turned the program relatively irrelevant again.
Sounds like Petersen, minus the "somewhat relevant" moment...
And just in the event you're being half serious, CP has put more guys in the nfl than most elite programs and actually won more BCS games than 95% of elite top 5 conference programs. I'll be the first to say I have no fucing clue if he makes it at UW, but to even place romar on CP's level is an embarrassment to CP. At least he has taken a lot less talent, made it better and actually won games. Where as Romar has taken far superior talent, middled or worse, and won nothing resembling a big game in his career.
Romar has put a lot of players into the NBA relative to most power 5 programs. Now you are saying having had NFL talent makes Pete good. But that was listed earlier as a reason why Romar sucks. Can't have it both ways.
Nobody fucking cares what Pete did at Boise junior college anymore. So far he is a total failure at UW. However, Romar has had some highlights at the Pac-12 level (conference championships, tournament runs). Levels of success Pete hasn't even sniffed while coaching at the big boy table.
That is pretty fucking sad when you think about it. Romar is better than Petersen. And Romar should be coaching at some private 1A church high school at best.
But, as always, I support coach Romar.
So you're killing Petersen after 25 months and two seasons, albeit disappointing seasons, but Romar, who hasn't made a tournament in five years is better somehow?
At least give Petersen next year before you start putting him under fucking Romar. If he's 6-6 and in some crap bowl again, fine. He's definitely another Boise CC fraud. Romar has done less with more than any other Pac 12 coach I can think of....maybe Lavin is close...and I've been watching the conference since 1987 or so.
Romar's failures are numerous and well documented.
And yet Romar's accomplishments far outshine Petersen's.
Since you've already arbitrarily decided that Petersen's entire Boise tenure, which includes two BCS Bowl wins (and are clearly better accomplishments than any of Romar's S16 appearances), don't count, you've now been left with comparing the accomplishments of two years of a football program to 13 years of a basketball program. It takes a special kind of idiot to actually try to turn that into a meaningful comparison. But knock yourself out.
I'm not a Boise St fan. Why would I give a fuck about Petersen's Boise W/L record or BCS bowls anymore? Those things got him the UW job, that's all they're good for. They're meaningless to us now that he is here.
Do you see me saying Romar gets credit for winning a Natty at UCLA? Fuck no.
If Petersen wins the conference next year he will be on Romar's level (champ in year 3). But do you honestly see that happening?
I don't.
So like I said, you're choosing to compare two years of a football program to 13 years of a basketball program. Fucking stupid doesn't even begin to describe your argument. You might as well be comparing Petersen's short tenure here to Bill Clinton's presidency.
WTF???
Romar won the conference year 3.
Can Petersen match that??? Not fucking likely.
Fucking stupid doesn't even begin to describe your ability to follow a thread.
Equating basketball and football is like comparing @Swaye and the pope. Basketball can be turned in 1 year. Literally. Football requires years and years of building lines to be competitive. I don't believe you're that naive to understand the difference. You can't send out 18 year olds and be competitive. And quite frankly, even basketball it's hard to build a program on Frosh and Soph players.
What is quite comical about this entire conversation is that we're comparing two coaches who not only are in incredibly different sports in terms of what it takes to win, but also dealing with a coach who lit his program on fire for 4 years and is now trying to salvage it. He was never great during his best years, but was just better than what UW had in years past.
CP is trying to take a dumpster fire which didn't have any trench guys and rebuild it from the studs. Whether it works or not is still up for debate, but what isn't up for debate is whether after 14 years you should expect better than what UW basketball is(or was). A couple sweet 16's. Yipee. Please don't bore us with conference tourney wins as some sort of accomplishment. With the amount of talent we've seen as fans come through the program I would expect a team which is going deep in the NCAA's every few years and competing for conference titles(the regular season kind) every year. The program hasn't been at that level since 2010.
If Petersen wins 4-5 conference games next year, he should be fired
If he competes for, and wins the PAC North next year, the entire argument as to whether he's the right guy for this program at this time should vanish.
The other argument that is completely fucktarded to me is the whole well if you hand the ball off earlier in the year more you might have got another win or two like it is a linear argument. This year was all about developing players and the team. If you can't see that the development of this team, and in particular offensively, grew as the year went on, then you just flat out aren't paying attention.
It's more than likely that he goes 4-5 next year or maybe a game better. He sucks.
You think we're beating Oregon and Stanford next year? I don't.
I would be surprised if we didn't beat at least one of them
Neither team broke a sweat this year and they have been ahead in terms of athletes for awhile now. It's already been shown that we aren't out-coaching them either. They would both have to have massively disappointing seasons at the same time for UW to have a chance. And I'm not satisfied with just beating 1 and then getting a 8-9 win season out of it. We're not the coogs.
If Petersen wins 4-5 conference games next year, he should be fired
If he competes for, and wins the PAC North next year, the entire argument as to whether he's the right guy for this program at this time should vanish.
The other argument that is completely fucktarded to me is the whole well if you hand the ball off earlier in the year more you might have got another win or two like it is a linear argument. This year was all about developing players and the team. If you can't see that the development of this team, and in particular offensively, grew as the year went on, then you just flat out aren't paying attention.
It's more than likely that he goes 4-5 next year or maybe a game better. He sucks.
You think we're beating Oregon and Stanford next year? I don't.
I would be surprised if we didn't beat at least one of them
Neither team broke a sweat this year and they have been ahead in terms of athletes for awhile now. It's already been shown that we aren't out-coaching them either. They would both have to have massively disappointing seasons at the same time for UW to have a chance. And I'm not satisfied with just beating 1 and then getting a 8-9 win season out of it. We're not the coogs.
Teams we play next year with new QBs starting for them:
Oregon Stanford Cal USC Arizona St Utah
That's 6 of 9 QBs on our PAC schedule
3 OOC games should be some rather easily wins.
Oregon St is Oregon St.
Arizona can't play defense.
That leaves the Cougs.
If you can't that next year is shaping up to be a great year for the Dawgs, you also probably think that Clay Helton will get USC turned in the right direction.
I don't think that the writer had a single tangible thought in the entire article ...
For those that use the whole "what was the program before Romar" argument in looking at relevance ... how many people are showing up to watch the games now? In other words, they aren't relevant now. So what Romar has really done is taken a program from irrelevant, made it somewhat relevant, pushed his chips into the middle for one and done guys, failed, and now has turned the program relatively irrelevant again.
Sounds like Petersen, minus the "somewhat relevant" moment...
And just in the event you're being half serious, CP has put more guys in the nfl than most elite programs and actually won more BCS games than 95% of elite top 5 conference programs. I'll be the first to say I have no fucing clue if he makes it at UW, but to even place romar on CP's level is an embarrassment to CP. At least he has taken a lot less talent, made it better and actually won games. Where as Romar has taken far superior talent, middled or worse, and won nothing resembling a big game in his career.
Romar has put a lot of players into the NBA relative to most power 5 programs. Now you are saying having had NFL talent makes Pete good. But that was listed earlier as a reason why Romar sucks. Can't have it both ways.
Nobody fucking cares what Pete did at Boise junior college anymore. So far he is a total failure at UW. However, Romar has had some highlights at the Pac-12 level (conference championships, tournament runs). Levels of success Pete hasn't even sniffed while coaching at the big boy table.
That is pretty fucking sad when you think about it. Romar is better than Petersen. And Romar should be coaching at some private 1A church high school at best.
But, as always, I support coach Romar.
So you're killing Petersen after 25 months and two seasons, albeit disappointing seasons, but Romar, who hasn't made a tournament in five years is better somehow?
At least give Petersen next year before you start putting him under fucking Romar. If he's 6-6 and in some crap bowl again, fine. He's definitely another Boise CC fraud. Romar has done less with more than any other Pac 12 coach I can think of....maybe Lavin is close...and I've been watching the conference since 1987 or so.
Romar's failures are numerous and well documented.
And yet Romar's accomplishments far outshine Petersen's.
Since you've already arbitrarily decided that Petersen's entire Boise tenure, which includes two BCS Bowl wins (and are clearly better accomplishments than any of Romar's S16 appearances), don't count, you've now been left with comparing the accomplishments of two years of a football program to 13 years of a basketball program. It takes a special kind of idiot to actually try to turn that into a meaningful comparison. But knock yourself out.
I'm not a Boise St fan. Why would I give a fuck about Petersen's Boise W/L record or BCS bowls anymore? Those things got him the UW job, that's all they're good for. They're meaningless to us now that he is here.
Do you see me saying Romar gets credit for winning a Natty at UCLA? Fuck no.
If Petersen wins the conference next year he will be on Romar's level (champ in year 3). But do you honestly see that happening?
I don't.
So like I said, you're choosing to compare two years of a football program to 13 years of a basketball program. Fucking stupid doesn't even begin to describe your argument. You might as well be comparing Petersen's short tenure here to Bill Clinton's presidency.
WTF???
Romar won the conference year 3.
Can Petersen match that??? Not fucking likely.
Fucking stupid doesn't even begin to describe your ability to follow a thread.
Equating basketball and football is like comparing @Swaye and the pope. Basketball can be turned in 1 year. Literally. Football requires years and years of building lines to be competitive. I don't believe you're that naive to understand the difference. You can't send out 18 year olds and be competitive. And quite frankly, even basketball it's hard to build a program on Frosh and Soph players.
What is quite comical about this entire conversation is that we're comparing two coaches who not only are in incredibly different sports in terms of what it takes to win, but also dealing with a coach who lit his program on fire for 4 years and is now trying to salvage it. He was never great during his best years, but was just better than what UW had in years past.
CP is trying to take a dumpster fire which didn't have any trench guys and rebuild it from the studs. Whether it works or not is still up for debate, but what isn't up for debate is whether after 14 years you should expect better than what UW basketball is(or was). A couple sweet 16's. Yipee. Please don't bore us with conference tourney wins as some sort of accomplishment. With the amount of talent we've seen as fans come through the program I would expect a team which is going deep in the NCAA's every few years and competing for conference titles(the regular season kind) every year. The program hasn't been at that level since 2010.
Wake us all up when Pete gets close to that level.
Comments
AKA, he fucking sucks.
At least give Petersen next year before you start putting him under fucking Romar. If he's 6-6 and in some crap bowl again, fine. He's definitely another Boise CC fraud. Romar has done less with more than any other Pac 12 coach I can think of....maybe Lavin is close...and I've been watching the conference since 1987 or so.
If there are more 7-5 or 8-4 seasons, I'll hold it against him.
If they start beating Oregon and at least winning the North, I won't.
And yet Romar's accomplishments far outshine Petersen's.
If he competes for, and wins the PAC North next year, the entire argument as to whether he's the right guy for this program at this time should vanish.
The other argument that is completely fucktarded to me is the whole well if you hand the ball off earlier in the year more you might have got another win or two like it is a linear argument. This year was all about developing players and the team. If you can't see that the development of this team, and in particular offensively, grew as the year went on, then you just flat out aren't paying attention.
Do you see me saying Romar gets credit for winning a Natty at UCLA? Fuck no.
If Petersen wins the conference next year he will be on Romar's level (champ in year 3). But do you honestly see that happening?
I don't.
You think we're beating Oregon and Stanford next year? I don't.
Romar won the conference year 3.
Can Petersen match that??? Not fucking likely.
Fucking stupid doesn't even begin to describe your ability to follow a thread.
What is quite comical about this entire conversation is that we're comparing two coaches who not only are in incredibly different sports in terms of what it takes to win, but also dealing with a coach who lit his program on fire for 4 years and is now trying to salvage it. He was never great during his best years, but was just better than what UW had in years past.
CP is trying to take a dumpster fire which didn't have any trench guys and rebuild it from the studs. Whether it works or not is still up for debate, but what isn't up for debate is whether after 14 years you should expect better than what UW basketball is(or was). A couple sweet 16's. Yipee. Please don't bore us with conference tourney wins as some sort of accomplishment. With the amount of talent we've seen as fans come through the program I would expect a team which is going deep in the NCAA's every few years and competing for conference titles(the regular season kind) every year. The program hasn't been at that level since 2010.
Oregon
Stanford
Cal
USC
Arizona St
Utah
That's 6 of 9 QBs on our PAC schedule
3 OOC games should be some rather easily wins.
Oregon St is Oregon St.
Arizona can't play defense.
That leaves the Cougs.
If you can't that next year is shaping up to be a great year for the Dawgs, you also probably think that Clay Helton will get USC turned in the right direction.
So far he hasn't even sniffed it.