Are we ever going to win 10 games?
Comments
-
Free Pub ??BearsWiin said:
I think you'll see at least 10-3 this year.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 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. -
UW was 8-6 in 2014.FremontTroll said:
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.HeretoBeatmyChest 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.
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...
Stop while you're being reverse conical grated. -
Cutting edge analysis hereTheHB said:If UW can't win 10 games with the easiest schedule in the galaxy next year, it will never happen.
-
CP took over prior to 2014. HTH.salemcoog said:
UW was 8-6 in 2014.FremontTroll said:
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.HeretoBeatmyChest 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.
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...
Stop while you're being reverse conical grated. -
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.
-
Some of you need to channel the power of positivity
-
Being compulsively and irrationally negative is just as much of a fucktard move as being a sunshine-pumping, excuse-making, participation trophy-awarding dumbshit.
-
This couldn't be more wrong.HuskyInAZ said:
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.TheHB said:If UW can't win 10 games with the easiest schedule in the galaxy next year, it will never happen.
2014 Oregon, 2012 Stanford, 2010 Oregon, 2008 USC, 2006 USC.
Its every other year. -
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.RaceBannon said:
But Petersen is a great coach right? We can't expect to win shit but stillHuskyInAZ said:
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.TheHB said:If UW can't win 10 games with the easiest schedule in the galaxy next year, it will never happen.
