Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.

Are we ever going to win 10 games?

124

Comments

  • TheHBTheHB Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 6,454 Swaye's Wigwam
    pat_hm said:

    Next question: Would you rather beat Oregon and win 9 games or lose to Oregon and win 10?

    Fuck that.
  • ApostleofGriefApostleofGrief Member Posts: 3,904
    Next year --> team is young

    My projections on spreadsheet show the turnaround to 10 wins happening in 2038
  • HuskyInAZHuskyInAZ Member Posts: 1,732
    TheHB said:

    If UW can't win 10 games with the easiest schedule in the galaxy next year, it will never happen.

    Too lazy to look it up, but from my understanding, no P12 has ever won the conference when playing 4 home, 5 away in conference. That's our schedule in 2016. Add to it we play SC/Utah as opposed to UCLA/Colorado, not really favorable at all. Non-conference games don't mean shit, as we're not going to compete for the national championship.
  • GladstoneGladstone Member Posts: 16,419

    Pete has to win 10 games or what...? He should be fired? He's not a championship coach? He sucks?

    Mark Dantonio only won 6 his third year. Then he won 3 conference titles the following 6 years. Art Briles was 7-6 his 3rd year and is 50-19 since. Fuck off with your fucking absolutes. Pete will be the coach here a long time and thats a good thing. He's doing a good job and will have success in the future.

    We need to win 10 games because it would help push recruiting up a notch. Current recruiting + Pete's program is enough for us to win a league title or two in the next 10 years. We are good enough to compete for a conference title at this point (2016 and future). But if we want to be a national program again or win several titles in a short span we need to get better players.

    And its not a huge difference we are talking about. Its basically being good enough to get that extra 4-5 star guy every year. If UW was 10-3 and 10-3 the past two years we get Long and maybe Eason. Maybe we steal a big time guy out of Cali like Tagaloa, Asiasi or Juarez. Over 3-4 years that shit adds up. Its a handful of guys. Get Kongbo and I really like the current class. But again, if we had enough past success we could have gotten probably 2 more big time guys.

    Where would the difference be on the current roster? This is Pete's 3rd class. If he had just gotten 1 blue chip WR and 1 blue chip safety (in addition to Budda) in his first 2 classes, our chances to win the north would be 19% higher.

    image
  • Fire_Marshall_BillFire_Marshall_Bill Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 24,658 Founders Club
    Another throw away season
  • RaceBannonRaceBannon Member, Moderator, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 108,499 Founders Club
    HuskyInAZ said:

    TheHB said:

    If UW can't win 10 games with the easiest schedule in the galaxy next year, it will never happen.

    Too lazy to look it up, but from my understanding, no P12 has ever won the conference when playing 4 home, 5 away in conference. That's our schedule in 2016. Add to it we play SC/Utah as opposed to UCLA/Colorado, not really favorable at all. Non-conference games don't mean shit, as we're not going to compete for the national championship.
    But Petersen is a great coach right? We can't expect to win shit but still
  • FremontTrollFremontTroll Member Posts: 4,744

    Pete has to win 10 games or what...? He should be fired? He's not a championship coach? He sucks?

    Mark Dantonio only won 6 his third year. Then he won 3 conference titles the following 6 years. Art Briles was 7-6 his 3rd year and is 50-19 since. Fuck off with your fucking absolutes. Pete will be the coach here a long time and thats a good thing. He's doing a good job and will have success in the future.

    We need to win 10 games because it would help push recruiting up a notch. Current recruiting + Pete's program is enough for us to win a league title or two in the next 10 years. We are good enough to compete for a conference title at this point (2016 and future). But if we want to be a national program again or win several titles in a short span we need to get better players.

    And its not a huge difference we are talking about. Its basically being good enough to get that extra 4-5 star guy every year. If UW was 10-3 and 10-3 the past two years we get Long and maybe Eason. Maybe we steal a big time guy out of Cali like Tagaloa, Asiasi or Juarez. Over 3-4 years that shit adds up. Its a handful of guys. Get Kongbo and I really like the current class. But again, if we had enough past success we could have gotten probably 2 more big time guys.

    Where would the difference be on the current roster? This is Pete's 3rd class. If he had just gotten 1 blue chip WR and 1 blue chip safety (in addition to Budda) in his first 2 classes, our chances to win the north would be 19% higher.

    Comparing 2014 Washington to 2007 MSU and 2008 Baylor would be laughable coming from anybody else but from the King of SRS? Its straight up disingenuous.

    Let's go to the tape and see what kind of messes CP, Briles and D'Antonio inherited, shall we? Our format shall be previous season, 4 year average.

    Scout Recruiting Rankings

    UW: 14, 17.25
    BU: 52, 65.25
    MSU: 43, 48

    W/L Record

    UW: 9-4, 7.5-5.5
    BU: 3-9, 3.75-8
    MSU: 4-8, 5.5-6.5

    SRS

    UW: 13, 40.25
    BU: 102, 83.5
    MSU: 74, 47.25

    I would graph this shit out but I'm lazy and the point should be pretty damn clear: the programs these coaches took over were in totally dissimilar situations.

    Baylor before Briles was a perennial doormat. Hadn't finished in the top 25 since 1986. Had never won the Big-12 (or even their division.) Hadn't been to a bowl since 1994. Baylor was the WSU of the Big-12 sans the early-2000s Dynasty. On top of that not only did Briles need to instill a complete culture change and get his guys in there- he ran a totally unique scheme for which the current roster was not at all suited for.

    Michigan State had a little more success and tradition than Baylor but prior to D'Antonio they were primarily known for choking in key moments: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Htr2UloK-5A

    http://edsbs.wikia.com/wiki/Sparty_No!

    They were essentially a program made up entirely of Jaydon Mickens clones. The idea that they were a program to fear was a laugher: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6455_8FsJOM.

    Yet we can go still deeper. You cite D'Antonio's third year record while conveniently ignoring that he went 9-4 in his second year. That schedule included OOC games vs. Notre Dame, @Cal, and a bowl loss vs. a Knowshown Moreno/Matt Stafford Georgia team that finished #10 in the nation. With UW's 2016 schedule and Pac-12 bowl alignments that is a 10 win team minimum.

    Now after all this skullfucking I am tired and need to take a break. Catch your breath Chest and have a doc look at that eye. Don't throw in the towel, Round 2 coming up...


  • HeretoBeatmyChestHeretoBeatmyChest Member Posts: 4,295
    UW in 2016 will be a lot better than those teams. Will win 9-11 games unless Gaskin/Browning miss multiple games.

    Never anywhere did I say 2016 was a throwaway season. I guess the senility is creeping in again for Uncle Race and his minions. Its important to win 10+ games in 2016 to get recruiting up and its important to win the league bc you have to take advantage of opportunities when they are there. But a single fucking season doesn't really change much. Pete could go 11-2 win the league then not win it again the next 5 years. He could go 9-4 then win the league two years in a row.
  • TurdBomberTurdBomber Member Posts: 19,989 Standard Supporter
    @HeretoBeatmyChest: Every time you qualify a prediction with could, should, or would, you foreclose another screen-grabber's favorite activity later on. More important than winning to some. image
  • FremontTrollFremontTroll Member Posts: 4,744
    For Round 2 we are going to delve into Year 3 CP/D'Antonio comparisons. Briles is off the table as an obviously buttfucking stupid comparison.

    Michigan State in Year 2 of D'Antonio's reign, as previously mentioned, finished 9-4 and 6-2 in conference. UW and CP finished 7-6, 4-5 but due to being really good at losing close games rated out highly in most advanced statistical ranking systems.

    What did each team bring back in Year 3?

    Michigan State:

    7 on offense/8 on defense. 113 total returning starts on offense, 170 returning starts on defense.

    -Most of MSU's returning offensive starts were at WR/TE. They lost starting QB Brian Hoyer, starting RB Javon Ringer (390 carries, 96% of team total), their three year starter at RT, and their three year starter at RG.

    -MSU returned a good amount of starters on defense however as pointed out in the previous post, there weren't many blue chippers on the roster D'Antonio inherited. Only two of those 8 returning starters would be drafted, both in the 6th round. D'Antonio's guys would start to emerge in 2009 however including Jerel Worthy and Trenton Robinson. How many of UW's 2016 returning starters are going to be drafted? Minimum 6?

    -The three starters MSU lost on defense were also key guys- two three-year starters on the DL both of whom were Honorable Mention Big Ten 2008. And a three year starting safety who was First Team All Big-Ten in 2008 and Honorable Mention in 2006.


    Washington:

    9 starters on offense/7 on defense. Phil Steele hasn't counted total starts yet and I'm certainly not going to.

    Losses:

    Mickens- Anyone think this is a loss?

    Perkins- I liked Perkins but if this leads to more PT and targets for Daniels then it is net gain.

    Tufunga- Somewhat of a loss, maybe.

    Defense:

    Tupou- Man among boys, 'nuff said.

    Littleton- a guy.

    Clay- a guy.

    Feeney- the one player that may be hard to replace.

    It gets fuzzy when you try to qualitatively compare the individual players but is there anybody out there that thinks UW's graduating seniors are anywhere close to equaling Hoyer, Ringer, two 3-year starters on the OL, two 3-year starters on the DL, and a 1st Team All-Big Ten Safety?


    Another angle to consider is that 2009 was D'Antonio's worse year by far (Race would have fired him.) MSU was just outside the top 25 preseason and the betting markets had them as the third favorite to win the BIG at 5/1 behind OSU and PSU. They ended up losing to Central Michigan AT HOME and at the mighty fighting Brewsters of Minnesota. Their only win against an FBS team that finished .500 or better was at home vs. Northwestern (MSU was 14 point favorites.)

    You'd better believe that if CP finishes 6-7 in Year 3 with a loss to Portland State that he is fired at the 50-yard line after the Apple Cup. CP doesn't have the goodwill that D'Antonio built up by following the John L. Smith clown show and winning 9 games in year 2.
  • pawzpawz Member, Moderator, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 21,502 Founders Club
    BearsWiin said:

    pat_hm said:

    Seriously. It's been what, 16 years?

    Petersen has one signature win in 2 years.

    The program has less than five signature wins since 2000, maybe one of them was on the road.

    No accountability.

    I'll believe it when I see it.

    I think you'll see at least 10-3 this year.

    I remember jawing on DM back in 2003/4 with Doogs who were pawsitive that Cal would shit the bed in 2004 because "Cal hasn't had three straight winning seasons in over 50 years so they never will again." Cal won 10 that year and the DM mantra quickly turned to "We're going to steal you're coach."

    Just because it hasn't happened in 16 years doesn't mean shit right now. UW has had crap coaches for too long. It has a good one now.
    Free Pub ??
  • KaepskneeKaepsknee Member Posts: 14,892

    Pete has to win 10 games or what...? He should be fired? He's not a championship coach? He sucks?

    Mark Dantonio only won 6 his third year. Then he won 3 conference titles the following 6 years. Art Briles was 7-6 his 3rd year and is 50-19 since. Fuck off with your fucking absolutes. Pete will be the coach here a long time and thats a good thing. He's doing a good job and will have success in the future.

    We need to win 10 games because it would help push recruiting up a notch. Current recruiting + Pete's program is enough for us to win a league title or two in the next 10 years. We are good enough to compete for a conference title at this point (2016 and future). But if we want to be a national program again or win several titles in a short span we need to get better players.

    And its not a huge difference we are talking about. Its basically being good enough to get that extra 4-5 star guy every year. If UW was 10-3 and 10-3 the past two years we get Long and maybe Eason. Maybe we steal a big time guy out of Cali like Tagaloa, Asiasi or Juarez. Over 3-4 years that shit adds up. Its a handful of guys. Get Kongbo and I really like the current class. But again, if we had enough past success we could have gotten probably 2 more big time guys.

    Where would the difference be on the current roster? This is Pete's 3rd class. If he had just gotten 1 blue chip WR and 1 blue chip safety (in addition to Budda) in his first 2 classes, our chances to win the north would be 19% higher.

    Comparing 2014 Washington to 2007 MSU and 2008 Baylor would be laughable coming from anybody else but from the King of SRS? Its straight up disingenuous.

    Let's go to the tape and see what kind of messes CP, Briles and D'Antonio inherited, shall we? Our format shall be previous season, 4 year average.

    Scout Recruiting Rankings

    UW: 14, 17.25
    BU: 52, 65.25
    MSU: 43, 48

    W/L Record

    UW: 9-4, 7.5-5.5
    BU: 3-9, 3.75-8
    MSU: 4-8, 5.5-6.5

    SRS

    UW: 13, 40.25
    BU: 102, 83.5
    MSU: 74, 47.25

    I would graph this shit out but I'm lazy and the point should be pretty damn clear: the programs these coaches took over were in totally dissimilar situations.

    Baylor before Briles was a perennial doormat. Hadn't finished in the top 25 since 1986. Had never won the Big-12 (or even their division.) Hadn't been to a bowl since 1994. Baylor was the WSU of the Big-12 sans the early-2000s Dynasty. On top of that not only did Briles need to instill a complete culture change and get his guys in there- he ran a totally unique scheme for which the current roster was not at all suited for.

    Michigan State had a little more success and tradition than Baylor but prior to D'Antonio they were primarily known for choking in key moments: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Htr2UloK-5A

    http://edsbs.wikia.com/wiki/Sparty_No!

    They were essentially a program made up entirely of Jaydon Mickens clones. The idea that they were a program to fear was a laugher: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6455_8FsJOM.

    Yet we can go still deeper. You cite D'Antonio's third year record while conveniently ignoring that he went 9-4 in his second year. That schedule included OOC games vs. Notre Dame, @Cal, and a bowl loss vs. a Knowshown Moreno/Matt Stafford Georgia team that finished #10 in the nation. With UW's 2016 schedule and Pac-12 bowl alignments that is a 10 win team minimum.

    Now after all this skullfucking I am tired and need to take a break. Catch your breath Chest and have a doc look at that eye. Don't throw in the towel, Round 2 coming up...


    UW was 8-6 in 2014.

    Stop while you're being reverse conical grated.
  • AIRWOLFAIRWOLF Member Posts: 1,840
    TheHB said:

    If UW can't win 10 games with the easiest schedule in the galaxy next year, it will never happen.

    Cutting edge analysis here
  • PurpleBazePurpleBaze Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 30,085 Founders Club
    AIRWOLF said:

    TheHB said:

    If UW can't win 10 games with the easiest schedule in the galaxy next year, it will never happen.

    Cutting edge analysis here
    LEAVE!!
  • FremontTrollFremontTroll Member Posts: 4,744
    salemcoog said:

    Pete has to win 10 games or what...? He should be fired? He's not a championship coach? He sucks?

    Mark Dantonio only won 6 his third year. Then he won 3 conference titles the following 6 years. Art Briles was 7-6 his 3rd year and is 50-19 since. Fuck off with your fucking absolutes. Pete will be the coach here a long time and thats a good thing. He's doing a good job and will have success in the future.

    We need to win 10 games because it would help push recruiting up a notch. Current recruiting + Pete's program is enough for us to win a league title or two in the next 10 years. We are good enough to compete for a conference title at this point (2016 and future). But if we want to be a national program again or win several titles in a short span we need to get better players.

    And its not a huge difference we are talking about. Its basically being good enough to get that extra 4-5 star guy every year. If UW was 10-3 and 10-3 the past two years we get Long and maybe Eason. Maybe we steal a big time guy out of Cali like Tagaloa, Asiasi or Juarez. Over 3-4 years that shit adds up. Its a handful of guys. Get Kongbo and I really like the current class. But again, if we had enough past success we could have gotten probably 2 more big time guys.

    Where would the difference be on the current roster? This is Pete's 3rd class. If he had just gotten 1 blue chip WR and 1 blue chip safety (in addition to Budda) in his first 2 classes, our chances to win the north would be 19% higher.

    Comparing 2014 Washington to 2007 MSU and 2008 Baylor would be laughable coming from anybody else but from the King of SRS? Its straight up disingenuous.

    Let's go to the tape and see what kind of messes CP, Briles and D'Antonio inherited, shall we? Our format shall be previous season, 4 year average.

    Scout Recruiting Rankings

    UW: 14, 17.25
    BU: 52, 65.25
    MSU: 43, 48

    W/L Record

    UW: 9-4, 7.5-5.5
    BU: 3-9, 3.75-8
    MSU: 4-8, 5.5-6.5

    SRS

    UW: 13, 40.25
    BU: 102, 83.5
    MSU: 74, 47.25

    I would graph this shit out but I'm lazy and the point should be pretty damn clear: the programs these coaches took over were in totally dissimilar situations.

    Baylor before Briles was a perennial doormat. Hadn't finished in the top 25 since 1986. Had never won the Big-12 (or even their division.) Hadn't been to a bowl since 1994. Baylor was the WSU of the Big-12 sans the early-2000s Dynasty. On top of that not only did Briles need to instill a complete culture change and get his guys in there- he ran a totally unique scheme for which the current roster was not at all suited for.

    Michigan State had a little more success and tradition than Baylor but prior to D'Antonio they were primarily known for choking in key moments: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Htr2UloK-5A

    http://edsbs.wikia.com/wiki/Sparty_No!

    They were essentially a program made up entirely of Jaydon Mickens clones. The idea that they were a program to fear was a laugher: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6455_8FsJOM.

    Yet we can go still deeper. You cite D'Antonio's third year record while conveniently ignoring that he went 9-4 in his second year. That schedule included OOC games vs. Notre Dame, @Cal, and a bowl loss vs. a Knowshown Moreno/Matt Stafford Georgia team that finished #10 in the nation. With UW's 2016 schedule and Pac-12 bowl alignments that is a 10 win team minimum.

    Now after all this skullfucking I am tired and need to take a break. Catch your breath Chest and have a doc look at that eye. Don't throw in the towel, Round 2 coming up...


    UW was 8-6 in 2014.

    Stop while you're being reverse conical grated.
    CP took over prior to 2014. HTH.
  • Fenderbender123Fenderbender123 Member Posts: 2,989
    What a negative topic. Relax. I'm sure the NCAA will eventually extend the season by a couple extra games and then we'll have a 10 win season every few years if we're lucky.
  • TequillaTequilla Member Posts: 19,965
    Some of you need to channel the power of positivity
  • AIRWOLFAIRWOLF Member Posts: 1,840
    Being compulsively and irrationally negative is just as much of a fucktard move as being a sunshine-pumping, excuse-making, participation trophy-awarding dumbshit.
  • FremontTrollFremontTroll Member Posts: 4,744
    HuskyInAZ said:

    TheHB said:

    If UW can't win 10 games with the easiest schedule in the galaxy next year, it will never happen.

    Too lazy to look it up, but from my understanding, no P12 has ever won the conference when playing 4 home, 5 away in conference. That's our schedule in 2016. Add to it we play SC/Utah as opposed to UCLA/Colorado, not really favorable at all. Non-conference games don't mean shit, as we're not going to compete for the national championship.
    This couldn't be more wrong.

    2014 Oregon, 2012 Stanford, 2010 Oregon, 2008 USC, 2006 USC.

    Its every other year.
  • HuskyInAZHuskyInAZ Member Posts: 1,732

    HuskyInAZ said:

    TheHB said:

    If UW can't win 10 games with the easiest schedule in the galaxy next year, it will never happen.

    Too lazy to look it up, but from my understanding, no P12 has ever won the conference when playing 4 home, 5 away in conference. That's our schedule in 2016. Add to it we play SC/Utah as opposed to UCLA/Colorado, not really favorable at all. Non-conference games don't mean shit, as we're not going to compete for the national championship.
    But Petersen is a great coach right? We can't expect to win shit but still
    My point is that the schedule is not overly favorable. I'm sure that when you get up in the years, it's a bit confusing. You get a pass for simply being an old dumbfuck.
Sign In or Register to comment.