Gaskin averaged 100 yards rushing per game as a true frosh?
Comments
-
Stale: Agreedpuppylove_sugarsteel said:
The past has nothing to do with it turd. . You are as bad as base.TurdBuffer said:@Ice_Holmvik: I get it's a process. But we're still not seeing the big, important wins. UW's been "on the upswing" or "building" or "doing it the right way" ever since 2008. It's now 2016. Sark had his best, 9 win season before he left, but everyone knows that season's schedule had more to do with win #9 than team improvement. Truth is, UW plateaued under Sark, still losing the big games and going to shit-tier bowls.
CP is different, and recruiting is a great indicator of internal program strength. But the red flag-wearing elephant in the room is Smiff. That's the one, big decision that I question CP's reasoning on. The Tedford hire may yield positive results, but it also shines a spotlight on the truck full of "special needs" equipment and support Smiff requires, which is like dumping thousands into a jalopy car worth $500.
Point that I agree with Race and iDawg about, is that nobody should be sporting a sweat pants boner anymore, until we see UW beating at least 3 of 4 Cali teams, both AZ's and of course, Oregon. And we can't get there with the best D in the conference. We need a potent offense, not a weak, troubled, dysfunctional passing game that makes UW one dimensional like last year.
This could be "the year," but fans have been saying that since 2008. CP's a big boy, paid a lot of money, in his third year of doing a job he says he always wanted. It's show me time. No more boner teases.YourThis narrative is stale, uninformed, poorly laid out and fucktarded beyond understanding.
Its official Turd, youve been escorted to gate. Not getting back on Pupwagon next year.
2009: 7
2015: 7 -
It's like 2011 all over again.Fire_Marshall_Bill said:
Nobody knows what's going to happen. That's the fucking point. Instead of just giving up and being as negative as possible for all 8 months of the offseason, I'll choose to see what happens. Signs are pointing to something better than the usual 7 or 8 win season. If not, we know CP is just another Boise CC coach who feasted on the NM States of the world. I'm on record as saying he's at least a good coach (probably not elite like Kelly or Meyer). If he's not fine. I'm wrong occasionally.TierbsHsotBoobs said:
Except he is wrong, unless you believe 4-5 > 4-5 > 5-4 > 5-4 > 5-4 > 5-4HuskyInAZ said:
You are not wrong.Fire_Marshall_Bill said:
I'm not butt hurt.m I'm Puppy's brother, remember? Some criticism is warranted and Smith probably should have been fired, and the Sark excuse (used by tons on here, but not me) is flimsy. Youth was more legitimate. I agree, he's probably 72-30 in the Pac 12.TurdBuffer said:
Bill: You did not write Oregon State. No, you didn't. My eyes deceive me, right?Fire_Marshall_Bill said:
Oklahomo, Oregon two years in a row, virgin tech, tcu twice, georgia Oregon stTierbsHsotBoobs said:
92-12 proved that he could inherit the dominant program in the WAC and beat retards.puppylove_sugarsteel said:
Pete's #1 quality is as a sideline coach Turd. WTF, do you even watch college football? . 92-12 before he got to UW pretty much backs it up. I watched every notable game Pete coached at bsu. Simply a master in big games. Sometimes puppy just shakes his head at some of the shit that dribbles out your cunts out here (hi kim)TurdBuffer said:
True and accurate. Pac12 is way tougher, top to bottom, than the MW, where many of Pete's wins were in his pocket before the game started. Context matters for expectations.EwaDawg said:
Pete is good at developing talent. In game coaching? He can get better.dnc said:
I know you're being sarcasmic but everything you said before the final sentence is true.PurpleJ said:Yeah and we had a GREAT defense and only went 7-6 (4-5). The metrics are pointing up.
Pete sure did a hell of a job last year.
I don't understand all the hurt butts about CP. I'm a fan, and I believe we're watching him grow into a top-tier Pac12 coach. But he's not there yet so stop dumping 100% of the fault on "Sark's players" or "youth." Who brought us Smiff, huh? Maybe this is the year CP breaks through to the top of the league. Great. But he got caught with his pants down around his ankles several times in '14 and '15, because the Pac12 is way tougher to navigate week in and week out than the MW. Very seldom will there be cupcakes in Pac12 league like in the MW. And that's why CP was 92-12 and not 72-30, which is still fucking great and justifies hiring him.
Jesus Christ, are we really arguing the MW is equal in strength to the Pac12?
There are people here who are just entrenched in their own narratives and thinking from 2008 or they're just trying hard to fit and be funny (usually failing) in or not rock the boat. I'm done with that shit. Tell me I'm wrong. -
Good stuff Billy, and well put. This is how dawg fans used to think. They had pride in their team, their head coach. Then boofs like J, Nacho, Race came along.Fire_Marshall_Bill said:
Nobody knows what's going to happen. That's the fucking point. Instead of just giving up and being as negative as possible for all 8 months of the offseason, I'll choose to see what happens. Signs are pointing to something better than the usual 7 or 8 win season. If not, we know CP is just another Boise CC coach who feasted on the NM States of the world. I'm on record as saying he's at least a good coach (probably not elite like Kelly or Meyer). If he's not fine. I'm wrong occasionally.TierbsHsotBoobs said:
Except he is wrong, unless you believe 4-5 > 4-5 > 5-4 > 5-4 > 5-4 > 5-4HuskyInAZ said:
You are not wrong.Fire_Marshall_Bill said:
I'm not butt hurt.m I'm Puppy's brother, remember? Some criticism is warranted and Smith probably should have been fired, and the Sark excuse (used by tons on here, but not me) is flimsy. Youth was more legitimate. I agree, he's probably 72-30 in the Pac 12.TurdBuffer said:
Bill: You did not write Oregon State. No, you didn't. My eyes deceive me, right?Fire_Marshall_Bill said:
Oklahomo, Oregon two years in a row, virgin tech, tcu twice, georgia Oregon stTierbsHsotBoobs said:
92-12 proved that he could inherit the dominant program in the WAC and beat retards.puppylove_sugarsteel said:
Pete's #1 quality is as a sideline coach Turd. WTF, do you even watch college football? . 92-12 before he got to UW pretty much backs it up. I watched every notable game Pete coached at bsu. Simply a master in big games. Sometimes puppy just shakes his head at some of the shit that dribbles out your cunts out here (hi kim)TurdBuffer said:
True and accurate. Pac12 is way tougher, top to bottom, than the MW, where many of Pete's wins were in his pocket before the game started. Context matters for expectations.EwaDawg said:
Pete is good at developing talent. In game coaching? He can get better.dnc said:
I know you're being sarcasmic but everything you said before the final sentence is true.PurpleJ said:Yeah and we had a GREAT defense and only went 7-6 (4-5). The metrics are pointing up.
Pete sure did a hell of a job last year.
I don't understand all the hurt butts about CP. I'm a fan, and I believe we're watching him grow into a top-tier Pac12 coach. But he's not there yet so stop dumping 100% of the fault on "Sark's players" or "youth." Who brought us Smiff, huh? Maybe this is the year CP breaks through to the top of the league. Great. But he got caught with his pants down around his ankles several times in '14 and '15, because the Pac12 is way tougher to navigate week in and week out than the MW. Very seldom will there be cupcakes in Pac12 league like in the MW. And that's why CP was 92-12 and not 72-30, which is still fucking great and justifies hiring him.
Jesus Christ, are we really arguing the MW is equal in strength to the Pac12?
There are people here who are just entrenched in their own narratives and thinking from 2008 or they're just trying hard to fit and be funny (usually failing) in or not rock the boat. I'm done with that shit. Tell me I'm wrong. -
If our coach is worth having pride in, he'll win the North this year and pop off.puppylove_sugarsteel said:
Good stuff Billy, and well put. This is how dawg fans used to think. They had pride in their team, their head coach. Then boofs like J, Nacho, Race came along.Fire_Marshall_Bill said:
Nobody knows what's going to happen. That's the fucking point. Instead of just giving up and being as negative as possible for all 8 months of the offseason, I'll choose to see what happens. Signs are pointing to something better than the usual 7 or 8 win season. If not, we know CP is just another Boise CC coach who feasted on the NM States of the world. I'm on record as saying he's at least a good coach (probably not elite like Kelly or Meyer). If he's not fine. I'm wrong occasionally.TierbsHsotBoobs said:
Except he is wrong, unless you believe 4-5 > 4-5 > 5-4 > 5-4 > 5-4 > 5-4HuskyInAZ said:
You are not wrong.Fire_Marshall_Bill said:
I'm not butt hurt.m I'm Puppy's brother, remember? Some criticism is warranted and Smith probably should have been fired, and the Sark excuse (used by tons on here, but not me) is flimsy. Youth was more legitimate. I agree, he's probably 72-30 in the Pac 12.TurdBuffer said:
Bill: You did not write Oregon State. No, you didn't. My eyes deceive me, right?Fire_Marshall_Bill said:
Oklahomo, Oregon two years in a row, virgin tech, tcu twice, georgia Oregon stTierbsHsotBoobs said:
92-12 proved that he could inherit the dominant program in the WAC and beat retards.puppylove_sugarsteel said:
Pete's #1 quality is as a sideline coach Turd. WTF, do you even watch college football? . 92-12 before he got to UW pretty much backs it up. I watched every notable game Pete coached at bsu. Simply a master in big games. Sometimes puppy just shakes his head at some of the shit that dribbles out your cunts out here (hi kim)TurdBuffer said:
True and accurate. Pac12 is way tougher, top to bottom, than the MW, where many of Pete's wins were in his pocket before the game started. Context matters for expectations.EwaDawg said:
Pete is good at developing talent. In game coaching? He can get better.dnc said:
I know you're being sarcasmic but everything you said before the final sentence is true.PurpleJ said:Yeah and we had a GREAT defense and only went 7-6 (4-5). The metrics are pointing up.
Pete sure did a hell of a job last year.
I don't understand all the hurt butts about CP. I'm a fan, and I believe we're watching him grow into a top-tier Pac12 coach. But he's not there yet so stop dumping 100% of the fault on "Sark's players" or "youth." Who brought us Smiff, huh? Maybe this is the year CP breaks through to the top of the league. Great. But he got caught with his pants down around his ankles several times in '14 and '15, because the Pac12 is way tougher to navigate week in and week out than the MW. Very seldom will there be cupcakes in Pac12 league like in the MW. And that's why CP was 92-12 and not 72-30, which is still fucking great and justifies hiring him.
Jesus Christ, are we really arguing the MW is equal in strength to the Pac12?
There are people here who are just entrenched in their own narratives and thinking from 2008 or they're just trying hard to fit and be funny (usually failing) in or not rock the boat. I'm done with that shit. Tell me I'm wrong.
If not, fire Peterman and get a coach worth supporting. -
I went to every game when Jim Owens went 1-10 in 1973. And then every game until Arizona 2007.puppylove_sugarsteel said:
Good stuff Billy, and well put. This is how dawg fans used to think. They had pride in their team, their head coach. Then boofs like J, Nacho, Race came along.Fire_Marshall_Bill said:
Nobody knows what's going to happen. That's the fucking point. Instead of just giving up and being as negative as possible for all 8 months of the offseason, I'll choose to see what happens. Signs are pointing to something better than the usual 7 or 8 win season. If not, we know CP is just another Boise CC coach who feasted on the NM States of the world. I'm on record as saying he's at least a good coach (probably not elite like Kelly or Meyer). If he's not fine. I'm wrong occasionally.TierbsHsotBoobs said:
Except he is wrong, unless you believe 4-5 > 4-5 > 5-4 > 5-4 > 5-4 > 5-4HuskyInAZ said:
You are not wrong.Fire_Marshall_Bill said:
I'm not butt hurt.m I'm Puppy's brother, remember? Some criticism is warranted and Smith probably should have been fired, and the Sark excuse (used by tons on here, but not me) is flimsy. Youth was more legitimate. I agree, he's probably 72-30 in the Pac 12.TurdBuffer said:
Bill: You did not write Oregon State. No, you didn't. My eyes deceive me, right?Fire_Marshall_Bill said:
Oklahomo, Oregon two years in a row, virgin tech, tcu twice, georgia Oregon stTierbsHsotBoobs said:
92-12 proved that he could inherit the dominant program in the WAC and beat retards.puppylove_sugarsteel said:
Pete's #1 quality is as a sideline coach Turd. WTF, do you even watch college football? . 92-12 before he got to UW pretty much backs it up. I watched every notable game Pete coached at bsu. Simply a master in big games. Sometimes puppy just shakes his head at some of the shit that dribbles out your cunts out here (hi kim)TurdBuffer said:
True and accurate. Pac12 is way tougher, top to bottom, than the MW, where many of Pete's wins were in his pocket before the game started. Context matters for expectations.EwaDawg said:
Pete is good at developing talent. In game coaching? He can get better.dnc said:
I know you're being sarcasmic but everything you said before the final sentence is true.PurpleJ said:Yeah and we had a GREAT defense and only went 7-6 (4-5). The metrics are pointing up.
Pete sure did a hell of a job last year.
I don't understand all the hurt butts about CP. I'm a fan, and I believe we're watching him grow into a top-tier Pac12 coach. But he's not there yet so stop dumping 100% of the fault on "Sark's players" or "youth." Who brought us Smiff, huh? Maybe this is the year CP breaks through to the top of the league. Great. But he got caught with his pants down around his ankles several times in '14 and '15, because the Pac12 is way tougher to navigate week in and week out than the MW. Very seldom will there be cupcakes in Pac12 league like in the MW. And that's why CP was 92-12 and not 72-30, which is still fucking great and justifies hiring him.
Jesus Christ, are we really arguing the MW is equal in strength to the Pac12?
There are people here who are just entrenched in their own narratives and thinking from 2008 or they're just trying hard to fit and be funny (usually failing) in or not rock the boat. I'm done with that shit. Tell me I'm wrong.
-
Success = Puppy bumping these threads next JanuaryTierbsHsotBoobs said:
If our coach is worth having pride in, he'll win the North this year and pop off.puppylove_sugarsteel said:
Good stuff Billy, and well put. This is how dawg fans used to think. They had pride in their team, their head coach. Then boofs like J, Nacho, Race came along.Fire_Marshall_Bill said:
Nobody knows what's going to happen. That's the fucking point. Instead of just giving up and being as negative as possible for all 8 months of the offseason, I'll choose to see what happens. Signs are pointing to something better than the usual 7 or 8 win season. If not, we know CP is just another Boise CC coach who feasted on the NM States of the world. I'm on record as saying he's at least a good coach (probably not elite like Kelly or Meyer). If he's not fine. I'm wrong occasionally.TierbsHsotBoobs said:
Except he is wrong, unless you believe 4-5 > 4-5 > 5-4 > 5-4 > 5-4 > 5-4HuskyInAZ said:
You are not wrong.Fire_Marshall_Bill said:
I'm not butt hurt.m I'm Puppy's brother, remember? Some criticism is warranted and Smith probably should have been fired, and the Sark excuse (used by tons on here, but not me) is flimsy. Youth was more legitimate. I agree, he's probably 72-30 in the Pac 12.TurdBuffer said:
Bill: You did not write Oregon State. No, you didn't. My eyes deceive me, right?Fire_Marshall_Bill said:
Oklahomo, Oregon two years in a row, virgin tech, tcu twice, georgia Oregon stTierbsHsotBoobs said:
92-12 proved that he could inherit the dominant program in the WAC and beat retards.puppylove_sugarsteel said:
Pete's #1 quality is as a sideline coach Turd. WTF, do you even watch college football? . 92-12 before he got to UW pretty much backs it up. I watched every notable game Pete coached at bsu. Simply a master in big games. Sometimes puppy just shakes his head at some of the shit that dribbles out your cunts out here (hi kim)TurdBuffer said:
True and accurate. Pac12 is way tougher, top to bottom, than the MW, where many of Pete's wins were in his pocket before the game started. Context matters for expectations.EwaDawg said:
Pete is good at developing talent. In game coaching? He can get better.dnc said:
I know you're being sarcasmic but everything you said before the final sentence is true.PurpleJ said:Yeah and we had a GREAT defense and only went 7-6 (4-5). The metrics are pointing up.
Pete sure did a hell of a job last year.
I don't understand all the hurt butts about CP. I'm a fan, and I believe we're watching him grow into a top-tier Pac12 coach. But he's not there yet so stop dumping 100% of the fault on "Sark's players" or "youth." Who brought us Smiff, huh? Maybe this is the year CP breaks through to the top of the league. Great. But he got caught with his pants down around his ankles several times in '14 and '15, because the Pac12 is way tougher to navigate week in and week out than the MW. Very seldom will there be cupcakes in Pac12 league like in the MW. And that's why CP was 92-12 and not 72-30, which is still fucking great and justifies hiring him.
Jesus Christ, are we really arguing the MW is equal in strength to the Pac12?
There are people here who are just entrenched in their own narratives and thinking from 2008 or they're just trying hard to fit and be funny (usually failing) in or not rock the boat. I'm done with that shit. Tell me I'm wrong.
If not, fire Peterman and get a coach worth supporting. -
Spot on...TurdBuffer said:
True and accurate. Pac12 is way tougher, top to bottom, than the MW, where many of Pete's wins were in his pocket before the game started. Context matters for expectations.EwaDawg said:
Pete is good at developing talent. In game coaching? He can get better.dnc said:
I know you're being sarcasmic but everything you said before the final sentence is true.PurpleJ said:Yeah and we had a GREAT defense and only went 7-6 (4-5). The metrics are pointing up.
Pete sure did a hell of a job last year.
Doogs hate the facts though. -
I'm gonna need to see OS 's ranking at that time.Fire_Marshall_Bill said:
Oklahomo, Oregon two years in a row, virgin tech, tcu twice, georgia Oregon stTierbsHsotBoobs said:
92-12 proved that he could inherit the dominant program in the WAC and beat retards.puppylove_sugarsteel said:
Pete's #1 quality is as a sideline coach Turd. WTF, do you even watch college football? . 92-12 before he got to UW pretty much backs it up. I watched every notable game Pete coached at bsu. Simply a master in big games. Sometimes puppy just shakes his head at some of the shit that dribbles out your cunts out here (hi kim)TurdBuffer said:
True and accurate. Pac12 is way tougher, top to bottom, than the MW, where many of Pete's wins were in his pocket before the game started. Context matters for expectations.EwaDawg said:
Pete is good at developing talent. In game coaching? He can get better.dnc said:
I know you're being sarcasmic but everything you said before the final sentence is true.PurpleJ said:Yeah and we had a GREAT defense and only went 7-6 (4-5). The metrics are pointing up.
Pete sure did a hell of a job last year. -
Miserable AND pathetic.RaceBannon said:
I went to every game when Jim Owens went 1-10 in 1973. And then every game until Arizona 2007.puppylove_sugarsteel said:
Good stuff Billy, and well put. This is how dawg fans used to think. They had pride in their team, their head coach. Then boofs like J, Nacho, Race came along.Fire_Marshall_Bill said:
Nobody knows what's going to happen. That's the fucking point. Instead of just giving up and being as negative as possible for all 8 months of the offseason, I'll choose to see what happens. Signs are pointing to something better than the usual 7 or 8 win season. If not, we know CP is just another Boise CC coach who feasted on the NM States of the world. I'm on record as saying he's at least a good coach (probably not elite like Kelly or Meyer). If he's not fine. I'm wrong occasionally.TierbsHsotBoobs said:
Except he is wrong, unless you believe 4-5 > 4-5 > 5-4 > 5-4 > 5-4 > 5-4HuskyInAZ said:
You are not wrong.Fire_Marshall_Bill said:
I'm not butt hurt.m I'm Puppy's brother, remember? Some criticism is warranted and Smith probably should have been fired, and the Sark excuse (used by tons on here, but not me) is flimsy. Youth was more legitimate. I agree, he's probably 72-30 in the Pac 12.TurdBuffer said:
Bill: You did not write Oregon State. No, you didn't. My eyes deceive me, right?Fire_Marshall_Bill said:
Oklahomo, Oregon two years in a row, virgin tech, tcu twice, georgia Oregon stTierbsHsotBoobs said:
92-12 proved that he could inherit the dominant program in the WAC and beat retards.puppylove_sugarsteel said:
Pete's #1 quality is as a sideline coach Turd. WTF, do you even watch college football? . 92-12 before he got to UW pretty much backs it up. I watched every notable game Pete coached at bsu. Simply a master in big games. Sometimes puppy just shakes his head at some of the shit that dribbles out your cunts out here (hi kim)TurdBuffer said:
True and accurate. Pac12 is way tougher, top to bottom, than the MW, where many of Pete's wins were in his pocket before the game started. Context matters for expectations.EwaDawg said:
Pete is good at developing talent. In game coaching? He can get better.dnc said:
I know you're being sarcasmic but everything you said before the final sentence is true.PurpleJ said:Yeah and we had a GREAT defense and only went 7-6 (4-5). The metrics are pointing up.
Pete sure did a hell of a job last year.
I don't understand all the hurt butts about CP. I'm a fan, and I believe we're watching him grow into a top-tier Pac12 coach. But he's not there yet so stop dumping 100% of the fault on "Sark's players" or "youth." Who brought us Smiff, huh? Maybe this is the year CP breaks through to the top of the league. Great. But he got caught with his pants down around his ankles several times in '14 and '15, because the Pac12 is way tougher to navigate week in and week out than the MW. Very seldom will there be cupcakes in Pac12 league like in the MW. And that's why CP was 92-12 and not 72-30, which is still fucking great and justifies hiring him.
Jesus Christ, are we really arguing the MW is equal in strength to the Pac12?
There are people here who are just entrenched in their own narratives and thinking from 2008 or they're just trying hard to fit and be funny (usually failing) in or not rock the boat. I'm done with that shit. Tell me I'm wrong. -
CP is just another Boise CC coach who feasted on the NM St's of the world. His record already spells that out. But He owns the Cougs, so you have that goin for ya.Fire_Marshall_Bill said:
Nobody knows what's going to happen. That's the fucking point. Instead of just giving up and being as negative as possible for all 8 months of the offseason, I'll choose to see what happens. Signs are pointing to something better than the usual 7 or 8 win season. If not, we know CP is just another Boise CC coach who feasted on the NM States of the world. I'm on record as saying he's at least a good coach (probably not elite like Kelly or Meyer). If he's not fine. I'm wrong occasionally.TierbsHsotBoobs said:
Except he is wrong, unless you believe 4-5 > 4-5 > 5-4 > 5-4 > 5-4 > 5-4HuskyInAZ said:
You are not wrong.Fire_Marshall_Bill said:
I'm not butt hurt.m I'm Puppy's brother, remember? Some criticism is warranted and Smith probably should have been fired, and the Sark excuse (used by tons on here, but not me) is flimsy. Youth was more legitimate. I agree, he's probably 72-30 in the Pac 12.TurdBuffer said:
Bill: You did not write Oregon State. No, you didn't. My eyes deceive me, right?Fire_Marshall_Bill said:
Oklahomo, Oregon two years in a row, virgin tech, tcu twice, georgia Oregon stTierbsHsotBoobs said:
92-12 proved that he could inherit the dominant program in the WAC and beat retards.puppylove_sugarsteel said:
Pete's #1 quality is as a sideline coach Turd. WTF, do you even watch college football? . 92-12 before he got to UW pretty much backs it up. I watched every notable game Pete coached at bsu. Simply a master in big games. Sometimes puppy just shakes his head at some of the shit that dribbles out your cunts out here (hi kim)TurdBuffer said:
True and accurate. Pac12 is way tougher, top to bottom, than the MW, where many of Pete's wins were in his pocket before the game started. Context matters for expectations.EwaDawg said:
Pete is good at developing talent. In game coaching? He can get better.dnc said:
I know you're being sarcasmic but everything you said before the final sentence is true.PurpleJ said:Yeah and we had a GREAT defense and only went 7-6 (4-5). The metrics are pointing up.
Pete sure did a hell of a job last year.
I don't understand all the hurt butts about CP. I'm a fan, and I believe we're watching him grow into a top-tier Pac12 coach. But he's not there yet so stop dumping 100% of the fault on "Sark's players" or "youth." Who brought us Smiff, huh? Maybe this is the year CP breaks through to the top of the league. Great. But he got caught with his pants down around his ankles several times in '14 and '15, because the Pac12 is way tougher to navigate week in and week out than the MW. Very seldom will there be cupcakes in Pac12 league like in the MW. And that's why CP was 92-12 and not 72-30, which is still fucking great and justifies hiring him.
Jesus Christ, are we really arguing the MW is equal in strength to the Pac12?
There are people here who are just entrenched in their own narratives and thinking from 2008 or they're just trying hard to fit and be funny (usually failing) in or not rock the boat. I'm done with that shit. Tell me I'm wrong. -
NOCsalemcoog said:
CP is just another Boise CC coach who feasted on the NM St's of the world. His record already spells that out. But He owns the Cougs, so you have that goin for ya.Fire_Marshall_Bill said:
Nobody knows what's going to happen. That's the fucking point. Instead of just giving up and being as negative as possible for all 8 months of the offseason, I'll choose to see what happens. Signs are pointing to something better than the usual 7 or 8 win season. If not, we know CP is just another Boise CC coach who feasted on the NM States of the world. I'm on record as saying he's at least a good coach (probably not elite like Kelly or Meyer). If he's not fine. I'm wrong occasionally.TierbsHsotBoobs said:
Except he is wrong, unless you believe 4-5 > 4-5 > 5-4 > 5-4 > 5-4 > 5-4HuskyInAZ said:
You are not wrong.Fire_Marshall_Bill said:
I'm not butt hurt.m I'm Puppy's brother, remember? Some criticism is warranted and Smith probably should have been fired, and the Sark excuse (used by tons on here, but not me) is flimsy. Youth was more legitimate. I agree, he's probably 72-30 in the Pac 12.TurdBuffer said:
Bill: You did not write Oregon State. No, you didn't. My eyes deceive me, right?Fire_Marshall_Bill said:
Oklahomo, Oregon two years in a row, virgin tech, tcu twice, georgia Oregon stTierbsHsotBoobs said:
92-12 proved that he could inherit the dominant program in the WAC and beat retards.puppylove_sugarsteel said:
Pete's #1 quality is as a sideline coach Turd. WTF, do you even watch college football? . 92-12 before he got to UW pretty much backs it up. I watched every notable game Pete coached at bsu. Simply a master in big games. Sometimes puppy just shakes his head at some of the shit that dribbles out your cunts out here (hi kim)TurdBuffer said:
True and accurate. Pac12 is way tougher, top to bottom, than the MW, where many of Pete's wins were in his pocket before the game started. Context matters for expectations.EwaDawg said:
Pete is good at developing talent. In game coaching? He can get better.dnc said:
I know you're being sarcasmic but everything you said before the final sentence is true.PurpleJ said:Yeah and we had a GREAT defense and only went 7-6 (4-5). The metrics are pointing up.
Pete sure did a hell of a job last year.
I don't understand all the hurt butts about CP. I'm a fan, and I believe we're watching him grow into a top-tier Pac12 coach. But he's not there yet so stop dumping 100% of the fault on "Sark's players" or "youth." Who brought us Smiff, huh? Maybe this is the year CP breaks through to the top of the league. Great. But he got caught with his pants down around his ankles several times in '14 and '15, because the Pac12 is way tougher to navigate week in and week out than the MW. Very seldom will there be cupcakes in Pac12 league like in the MW. And that's why CP was 92-12 and not 72-30, which is still fucking great and justifies hiring him.
Jesus Christ, are we really arguing the MW is equal in strength to the Pac12?
There are people here who are just entrenched in their own narratives and thinking from 2008 or they're just trying hard to fit and be funny (usually failing) in or not rock the boat. I'm done with that shit. Tell me I'm wrong. -
Puppy, puppy, puppy....That's just FS and you know it. Sark left the cupboard bare in spots, no doubt, but Ty had no D worth a shit, even with good players on the team, and couldn't hold a candle to all the D studs on CP's first, well-coached defense at UW.puppylove_sugarsteel said:
Uh Turd, those are the facts. This team was on par with ty's 0-12 team when Pete took over. Cyress was that bad. This team would have won 4 games last year with Sark and maybe 5-6 next year. Those are more facts.TurdBuffer said:
Bill: You did not write Oregon State. No, you didn't. My eyes deceive me, right?Fire_Marshall_Bill said:
Oklahomo, Oregon two years in a row, virgin tech, tcu twice, georgia Oregon stTierbsHsotBoobs said:
92-12 proved that he could inherit the dominant program in the WAC and beat retards.puppylove_sugarsteel said:
Pete's #1 quality is as a sideline coach Turd. WTF, do you even watch college football? . 92-12 before he got to UW pretty much backs it up. I watched every notable game Pete coached at bsu. Simply a master in big games. Sometimes puppy just shakes his head at some of the shit that dribbles out your cunts out here (hi kim)TurdBuffer said:
True and accurate. Pac12 is way tougher, top to bottom, than the MW, where many of Pete's wins were in his pocket before the game started. Context matters for expectations.EwaDawg said:
Pete is good at developing talent. In game coaching? He can get better.dnc said:
I know you're being sarcasmic but everything you said before the final sentence is true.PurpleJ said:Yeah and we had a GREAT defense and only went 7-6 (4-5). The metrics are pointing up.
Pete sure did a hell of a job last year.
I don't understand all the hurt butts about CP. I'm a fan, and I believe we're watching him grow into a top-tier Pac12 coach. But he's not there yet so stop dumping 100% of the fault on "Sark's players" or "youth." Who brought us Smiff, huh? Maybe this is the year CP breaks through to the top of the league. Great. But he got caught with his pants down around his ankles several times in '14 and '15, because the Pac12 is way tougher to navigate week in and week out than the MW. Very seldom will there be cupcakes in Pac12 league like in the MW. And that's why CP was 92-12 and not 72-30, which is still fucking great and justifies hiring him.
Jesus Christ, are we really arguing the MW is equal in strength to the Pac12?
I like and share your optimism, Pup. But you can't keep up this "Move along, nothing to see here" about the last 15 years. We all know the difference between hype and results. Well, most of us, anyway. -
I'm not being the least bit negative, just realistic and not overly optimistic based on what I've seen and the fact that we still have a FS OC. That's why I've repeatedly predicted UW will be 9-3, likely after losing one winnable game. Thus, inherently a 10 win capable team. And if CP holds UW together and breaks through to 10 wins, Ha-le-fucking-lluja! He'll have earned the respect he gets and join the 10 Win Club in the Pac12.Fire_Marshall_Bill said:
Nobody knows what's going to happen. That's the fucking point. Instead of just giving up and being as negative as possible for all 8 months of the offseason, I'll choose to see what happens. Signs are pointing to something better than the usual 7 or 8 win season. If not, we know CP is just another Boise CC coach who feasted on the NM States of the world. I'm on record as saying he's at least a good coach (probably not elite like Kelly or Meyer). If he's not fine. I'm wrong occasionally.TierbsHsotBoobs said:
Except he is wrong, unless you believe 4-5 > 4-5 > 5-4 > 5-4 > 5-4 > 5-4HuskyInAZ said:
You are not wrong.Fire_Marshall_Bill said:
I'm not butt hurt.m I'm Puppy's brother, remember? Some criticism is warranted and Smith probably should have been fired, and the Sark excuse (used by tons on here, but not me) is flimsy. Youth was more legitimate. I agree, he's probably 72-30 in the Pac 12.TurdBuffer said:
Bill: You did not write Oregon State. No, you didn't. My eyes deceive me, right?Fire_Marshall_Bill said:
Oklahomo, Oregon two years in a row, virgin tech, tcu twice, georgia Oregon stTierbsHsotBoobs said:
92-12 proved that he could inherit the dominant program in the WAC and beat retards.puppylove_sugarsteel said:
Pete's #1 quality is as a sideline coach Turd. WTF, do you even watch college football? . 92-12 before he got to UW pretty much backs it up. I watched every notable game Pete coached at bsu. Simply a master in big games. Sometimes puppy just shakes his head at some of the shit that dribbles out your cunts out here (hi kim)TurdBuffer said:
True and accurate. Pac12 is way tougher, top to bottom, than the MW, where many of Pete's wins were in his pocket before the game started. Context matters for expectations.EwaDawg said:
Pete is good at developing talent. In game coaching? He can get better.dnc said:
I know you're being sarcasmic but everything you said before the final sentence is true.PurpleJ said:Yeah and we had a GREAT defense and only went 7-6 (4-5). The metrics are pointing up.
Pete sure did a hell of a job last year.
I don't understand all the hurt butts about CP. I'm a fan, and I believe we're watching him grow into a top-tier Pac12 coach. But he's not there yet so stop dumping 100% of the fault on "Sark's players" or "youth." Who brought us Smiff, huh? Maybe this is the year CP breaks through to the top of the league. Great. But he got caught with his pants down around his ankles several times in '14 and '15, because the Pac12 is way tougher to navigate week in and week out than the MW. Very seldom will there be cupcakes in Pac12 league like in the MW. And that's why CP was 92-12 and not 72-30, which is still fucking great and justifies hiring him.
Jesus Christ, are we really arguing the MW is equal in strength to the Pac12?
There are people here who are just entrenched in their own narratives and thinking from 2008 or they're just trying hard to fit and be funny (usually failing) in or not rock the boat. I'm done with that shit. Tell me I'm wrong.
I'm a big CP fan that watched the #1 Defense in the Pac12 get beaten down by Cal, ASU and Utah last year, in very winnable games, much due to a stalled, sputtering offense. Who honesly thinks UW's offense is going from a 1 or 2 to a 9 or 10 in one year, with no proven, dependable receivers on the team? I hope I'm surprised, but I can't be so optimistic based on recent, relevant history. -
I need validation though.ThomasFremont said:
NOCsalemcoog said:
CP is just another Boise CC coach who feasted on the NM St's of the world. His record already spells that out. But He owns the Cougs, so you have that goin for ya.Fire_Marshall_Bill said:
Nobody knows what's going to happen. That's the fucking point. Instead of just giving up and being as negative as possible for all 8 months of the offseason, I'll choose to see what happens. Signs are pointing to something better than the usual 7 or 8 win season. If not, we know CP is just another Boise CC coach who feasted on the NM States of the world. I'm on record as saying he's at least a good coach (probably not elite like Kelly or Meyer). If he's not fine. I'm wrong occasionally.TierbsHsotBoobs said:
Except he is wrong, unless you believe 4-5 > 4-5 > 5-4 > 5-4 > 5-4 > 5-4HuskyInAZ said:
You are not wrong.Fire_Marshall_Bill said:
I'm not butt hurt.m I'm Puppy's brother, remember? Some criticism is warranted and Smith probably should have been fired, and the Sark excuse (used by tons on here, but not me) is flimsy. Youth was more legitimate. I agree, he's probably 72-30 in the Pac 12.TurdBuffer said:
Bill: You did not write Oregon State. No, you didn't. My eyes deceive me, right?Fire_Marshall_Bill said:
Oklahomo, Oregon two years in a row, virgin tech, tcu twice, georgia Oregon stTierbsHsotBoobs said:
92-12 proved that he could inherit the dominant program in the WAC and beat retards.puppylove_sugarsteel said:
Pete's #1 quality is as a sideline coach Turd. WTF, do you even watch college football? . 92-12 before he got to UW pretty much backs it up. I watched every notable game Pete coached at bsu. Simply a master in big games. Sometimes puppy just shakes his head at some of the shit that dribbles out your cunts out here (hi kim)TurdBuffer said:
True and accurate. Pac12 is way tougher, top to bottom, than the MW, where many of Pete's wins were in his pocket before the game started. Context matters for expectations.EwaDawg said:
Pete is good at developing talent. In game coaching? He can get better.dnc said:
I know you're being sarcasmic but everything you said before the final sentence is true.PurpleJ said:Yeah and we had a GREAT defense and only went 7-6 (4-5). The metrics are pointing up.
Pete sure did a hell of a job last year.
I don't understand all the hurt butts about CP. I'm a fan, and I believe we're watching him grow into a top-tier Pac12 coach. But he's not there yet so stop dumping 100% of the fault on "Sark's players" or "youth." Who brought us Smiff, huh? Maybe this is the year CP breaks through to the top of the league. Great. But he got caught with his pants down around his ankles several times in '14 and '15, because the Pac12 is way tougher to navigate week in and week out than the MW. Very seldom will there be cupcakes in Pac12 league like in the MW. And that's why CP was 92-12 and not 72-30, which is still fucking great and justifies hiring him.
Jesus Christ, are we really arguing the MW is equal in strength to the Pac12?
There are people here who are just entrenched in their own narratives and thinking from 2008 or they're just trying hard to fit and be funny (usually failing) in or not rock the boat. I'm done with that shit. Tell me I'm wrong. -
This is a quality response. I understand completely what you are saying. But I do see a HUGE difference between how Sark built his teams and the culture he groomed compared to how Pete is building his team. This year should be a great barometer of where this team is headed.TurdBuffer said:@Ice_Holmvik: I get it's a process. But we're still not seeing the big, important wins. UW's been "on the upswing" or "building" or "doing it the right way" ever since 2008. It's now 2016. Sark had his best, 9 win season before he left, but everyone knows that season's schedule had more to do with win #9 than team improvement. Truth is, UW plateaued under Sark, still losing the big games and going to shit-tier bowls.
CP is different, and recruiting is a great indicator of internal program strength. But the red flag-wearing elephant in the room is Smiff. That's the one, big decision that I question CP's reasoning on. The Tedford hire may yield positive results, but it also shines a spotlight on the truck full of "special needs" equipment and support Smiff requires, which is like dumping thousands into a jalopy car worth $500.
Point that I agree with Race and iDawg about, is that nobody should be sporting a sweat pants boner anymore, until we see UW beating at least 3 of 4 Cali teams, both AZ's and of course, Oregon. And we can't get there with the best D in the conference. We need a potent offense, not a weak, troubled, dysfunctional passing game that makes UW one dimensional like last year.
This could be "the year," but fans have been saying that since 2008. CP's a big boy, paid a lot of money, in his third year of doing a job he says he always wanted. It's show me time. No more boner teases. -
Ty was a molder of men who built teams the right way until he wasn't.Ice_Holmvik said:
This is a quality response. I understand completely what you are saying. But I do see a HUGE difference between how Sark built his teams and the culture he groomed compared to how Pete is building his team. This year should be a great barometer of where this team is headed.TurdBuffer said:@Ice_Holmvik: I get it's a process. But we're still not seeing the big, important wins. UW's been "on the upswing" or "building" or "doing it the right way" ever since 2008. It's now 2016. Sark had his best, 9 win season before he left, but everyone knows that season's schedule had more to do with win #9 than team improvement. Truth is, UW plateaued under Sark, still losing the big games and going to shit-tier bowls.
CP is different, and recruiting is a great indicator of internal program strength. But the red flag-wearing elephant in the room is Smiff. That's the one, big decision that I question CP's reasoning on. The Tedford hire may yield positive results, but it also shines a spotlight on the truck full of "special needs" equipment and support Smiff requires, which is like dumping thousands into a jalopy car worth $500.
Point that I agree with Race and iDawg about, is that nobody should be sporting a sweat pants boner anymore, until we see UW beating at least 3 of 4 Cali teams, both AZ's and of course, Oregon. And we can't get there with the best D in the conference. We need a potent offense, not a weak, troubled, dysfunctional passing game that makes UW one dimensional like last year.
This could be "the year," but fans have been saying that since 2008. CP's a big boy, paid a lot of money, in his third year of doing a job he says he always wanted. It's show me time. No more boner teases. -
Ty fancied himself a molder of men but that was a fallacy. Petersen has a track record at Boise that speaks for itself. BUT the big difference is that Pete's first two recruiting classes are better than all of Ty's recruiting classes combined. And it is not even close. You can mold men all you want. You still gotta have the Jimmie's and Joe's.TierbsHsotBoobs said:
Ty was a molder of men who built teams the right way until he wasn't.Ice_Holmvik said:
This is a quality response. I understand completely what you are saying. But I do see a HUGE difference between how Sark built his teams and the culture he groomed compared to how Pete is building his team. This year should be a great barometer of where this team is headed.TurdBuffer said:@Ice_Holmvik: I get it's a process. But we're still not seeing the big, important wins. UW's been "on the upswing" or "building" or "doing it the right way" ever since 2008. It's now 2016. Sark had his best, 9 win season before he left, but everyone knows that season's schedule had more to do with win #9 than team improvement. Truth is, UW plateaued under Sark, still losing the big games and going to shit-tier bowls.
CP is different, and recruiting is a great indicator of internal program strength. But the red flag-wearing elephant in the room is Smiff. That's the one, big decision that I question CP's reasoning on. The Tedford hire may yield positive results, but it also shines a spotlight on the truck full of "special needs" equipment and support Smiff requires, which is like dumping thousands into a jalopy car worth $500.
Point that I agree with Race and iDawg about, is that nobody should be sporting a sweat pants boner anymore, until we see UW beating at least 3 of 4 Cali teams, both AZ's and of course, Oregon. And we can't get there with the best D in the conference. We need a potent offense, not a weak, troubled, dysfunctional passing game that makes UW one dimensional like last year.
This could be "the year," but fans have been saying that since 2008. CP's a big boy, paid a lot of money, in his third year of doing a job he says he always wanted. It's show me time. No more boner teases. -
Isn't their record the difference? FMFYFE.Ice_Holmvik said:
Ty fancied himself a molder of men but that was a fallacy. Petersen has a track record at Boise that speaks for itself. BUT the big difference is that Pete's first two recruiting classes are better than all of Ty's recruiting classes combined. And it is not even close. You can mold men all you want. You still gotta have the Jimmie's and Joe's.TierbsHsotBoobs said:
Ty was a molder of men who built teams the right way until he wasn't.Ice_Holmvik said:
This is a quality response. I understand completely what you are saying. But I do see a HUGE difference between how Sark built his teams and the culture he groomed compared to how Pete is building his team. This year should be a great barometer of where this team is headed.TurdBuffer said:@Ice_Holmvik: I get it's a process. But we're still not seeing the big, important wins. UW's been "on the upswing" or "building" or "doing it the right way" ever since 2008. It's now 2016. Sark had his best, 9 win season before he left, but everyone knows that season's schedule had more to do with win #9 than team improvement. Truth is, UW plateaued under Sark, still losing the big games and going to shit-tier bowls.
CP is different, and recruiting is a great indicator of internal program strength. But the red flag-wearing elephant in the room is Smiff. That's the one, big decision that I question CP's reasoning on. The Tedford hire may yield positive results, but it also shines a spotlight on the truck full of "special needs" equipment and support Smiff requires, which is like dumping thousands into a jalopy car worth $500.
Point that I agree with Race and iDawg about, is that nobody should be sporting a sweat pants boner anymore, until we see UW beating at least 3 of 4 Cali teams, both AZ's and of course, Oregon. And we can't get there with the best D in the conference. We need a potent offense, not a weak, troubled, dysfunctional passing game that makes UW one dimensional like last year.
This could be "the year," but fans have been saying that since 2008. CP's a big boy, paid a lot of money, in his third year of doing a job he says he always wanted. It's show me time. No more boner teases.
Sark was better than Ty, too. -
Sark WAS better than TY. I am thankful for having Sarkisian at UW. He came to us at 0-12 and was exactly the boost of energy the program needed after the tyranny of Ty. He bropught back the spirit of "Say Who, Say What?" Who else was coming to UW at that time? He got us to the point where we could hire a Chris Petersen. Sark plateaued here but in the history of UW going forward he should be remembered as a an important piece in the rebuild of UW. Thank God Hayden hired him when he did and he imploded at USC not UW or his time here would not be seen as favorably.PurpleJ said:
Isn't their record the difference? FMFYFE.Ice_Holmvik said:
Ty fancied himself a molder of men but that was a fallacy. Petersen has a track record at Boise that speaks for itself. BUT the big difference is that Pete's first two recruiting classes are better than all of Ty's recruiting classes combined. And it is not even close. You can mold men all you want. You still gotta have the Jimmie's and Joe's.TierbsHsotBoobs said:
Ty was a molder of men who built teams the right way until he wasn't.Ice_Holmvik said:
This is a quality response. I understand completely what you are saying. But I do see a HUGE difference between how Sark built his teams and the culture he groomed compared to how Pete is building his team. This year should be a great barometer of where this team is headed.TurdBuffer said:@Ice_Holmvik: I get it's a process. But we're still not seeing the big, important wins. UW's been "on the upswing" or "building" or "doing it the right way" ever since 2008. It's now 2016. Sark had his best, 9 win season before he left, but everyone knows that season's schedule had more to do with win #9 than team improvement. Truth is, UW plateaued under Sark, still losing the big games and going to shit-tier bowls.
CP is different, and recruiting is a great indicator of internal program strength. But the red flag-wearing elephant in the room is Smiff. That's the one, big decision that I question CP's reasoning on. The Tedford hire may yield positive results, but it also shines a spotlight on the truck full of "special needs" equipment and support Smiff requires, which is like dumping thousands into a jalopy car worth $500.
Point that I agree with Race and iDawg about, is that nobody should be sporting a sweat pants boner anymore, until we see UW beating at least 3 of 4 Cali teams, both AZ's and of course, Oregon. And we can't get there with the best D in the conference. We need a potent offense, not a weak, troubled, dysfunctional passing game that makes UW one dimensional like last year.
This could be "the year," but fans have been saying that since 2008. CP's a big boy, paid a lot of money, in his third year of doing a job he says he always wanted. It's show me time. No more boner teases.
Sark was better than Ty, too. -
Ice_Holmvik said:
Sark WAS better than TY. I am thankful for having Sarkisian at UW. He came to us at 0-12 and was exactly the boost of energy the program needed after the tyranny of Ty. He bropught back the spirit of "Say Who, Say What?" Who else was coming to UW at that time? He got us to the point where we could hire a Chris Petersen. Sark plateaued here but in the history of UW going forward he should be remembered as a an important piece in the rebuild of UW. Thank God Hayden hired him when he did and he imploded at USC not UW or his time here would not be seen as favorably.PurpleJ said:
Isn't their record the difference? FMFYFE.Ice_Holmvik said:
Ty fancied himself a molder of men but that was a fallacy. Petersen has a track record at Boise that speaks for itself. BUT the big difference is that Pete's first two recruiting classes are better than all of Ty's recruiting classes combined. And it is not even close. You can mold men all you want. You still gotta have the Jimmie's and Joe's.TierbsHsotBoobs said:
Ty was a molder of men who built teams the right way until he wasn't.Ice_Holmvik said:
This is a quality response. I understand completely what you are saying. But I do see a HUGE difference between how Sark built his teams and the culture he groomed compared to how Pete is building his team. This year should be a great barometer of where this team is headed.TurdBuffer said:@Ice_Holmvik: I get it's a process. But we're still not seeing the big, important wins. UW's been "on the upswing" or "building" or "doing it the right way" ever since 2008. It's now 2016. Sark had his best, 9 win season before he left, but everyone knows that season's schedule had more to do with win #9 than team improvement. Truth is, UW plateaued under Sark, still losing the big games and going to shit-tier bowls.
CP is different, and recruiting is a great indicator of internal program strength. But the red flag-wearing elephant in the room is Smiff. That's the one, big decision that I question CP's reasoning on. The Tedford hire may yield positive results, but it also shines a spotlight on the truck full of "special needs" equipment and support Smiff requires, which is like dumping thousands into a jalopy car worth $500.
Point that I agree with Race and iDawg about, is that nobody should be sporting a sweat pants boner anymore, until we see UW beating at least 3 of 4 Cali teams, both AZ's and of course, Oregon. And we can't get there with the best D in the conference. We need a potent offense, not a weak, troubled, dysfunctional passing game that makes UW one dimensional like last year.
This could be "the year," but fans have been saying that since 2008. CP's a big boy, paid a lot of money, in his third year of doing a job he says he always wanted. It's show me time. No more boner teases.
Sark was better than Ty, too.
-
Fine.Ice_Holmvik said:
Ty fancied himself a molder of men but that was a fallacy. Petersen has a track record at Boise that speaks for itself. BUT the big difference is that Pete's first two recruiting classes are better than all of Ty's recruiting classes combined. And it is not even close. You can mold men all you want. You still gotta have the Jimmie's and Joe's.TierbsHsotBoobs said:
Ty was a molder of men who built teams the right way until he wasn't.Ice_Holmvik said:
This is a quality response. I understand completely what you are saying. But I do see a HUGE difference between how Sark built his teams and the culture he groomed compared to how Pete is building his team. This year should be a great barometer of where this team is headed.TurdBuffer said:@Ice_Holmvik: I get it's a process. But we're still not seeing the big, important wins. UW's been "on the upswing" or "building" or "doing it the right way" ever since 2008. It's now 2016. Sark had his best, 9 win season before he left, but everyone knows that season's schedule had more to do with win #9 than team improvement. Truth is, UW plateaued under Sark, still losing the big games and going to shit-tier bowls.
CP is different, and recruiting is a great indicator of internal program strength. But the red flag-wearing elephant in the room is Smiff. That's the one, big decision that I question CP's reasoning on. The Tedford hire may yield positive results, but it also shines a spotlight on the truck full of "special needs" equipment and support Smiff requires, which is like dumping thousands into a jalopy car worth $500.
Point that I agree with Race and iDawg about, is that nobody should be sporting a sweat pants boner anymore, until we see UW beating at least 3 of 4 Cali teams, both AZ's and of course, Oregon. And we can't get there with the best D in the conference. We need a potent offense, not a weak, troubled, dysfunctional passing game that makes UW one dimensional like last year.
This could be "the year," but fans have been saying that since 2008. CP's a big boy, paid a lot of money, in his third year of doing a job he says he always wanted. It's show me time. No more boner teases.
Ron Zook was a great recruiter too. How did that work out? -
Great after they fired his ass and hired a real coachTierbsHsotBoobs said:
Fine.Ice_Holmvik said:
Ty fancied himself a molder of men but that was a fallacy. Petersen has a track record at Boise that speaks for itself. BUT the big difference is that Pete's first two recruiting classes are better than all of Ty's recruiting classes combined. And it is not even close. You can mold men all you want. You still gotta have the Jimmie's and Joe's.TierbsHsotBoobs said:
Ty was a molder of men who built teams the right way until he wasn't.Ice_Holmvik said:
This is a quality response. I understand completely what you are saying. But I do see a HUGE difference between how Sark built his teams and the culture he groomed compared to how Pete is building his team. This year should be a great barometer of where this team is headed.TurdBuffer said:@Ice_Holmvik: I get it's a process. But we're still not seeing the big, important wins. UW's been "on the upswing" or "building" or "doing it the right way" ever since 2008. It's now 2016. Sark had his best, 9 win season before he left, but everyone knows that season's schedule had more to do with win #9 than team improvement. Truth is, UW plateaued under Sark, still losing the big games and going to shit-tier bowls.
CP is different, and recruiting is a great indicator of internal program strength. But the red flag-wearing elephant in the room is Smiff. That's the one, big decision that I question CP's reasoning on. The Tedford hire may yield positive results, but it also shines a spotlight on the truck full of "special needs" equipment and support Smiff requires, which is like dumping thousands into a jalopy car worth $500.
Point that I agree with Race and iDawg about, is that nobody should be sporting a sweat pants boner anymore, until we see UW beating at least 3 of 4 Cali teams, both AZ's and of course, Oregon. And we can't get there with the best D in the conference. We need a potent offense, not a weak, troubled, dysfunctional passing game that makes UW one dimensional like last year.
This could be "the year," but fans have been saying that since 2008. CP's a big boy, paid a lot of money, in his third year of doing a job he says he always wanted. It's show me time. No more boner teases.
Ron Zook was a great recruiter too. How did that work out? -
Fine.
Ron Zook was a great recruiter too. How did that work out?
Your original statement was Ty. But if you want to go with Ron Zook now all I can say is DAMN... It is obvious Petersen is not Zook. Look deeper into how the program is being built is all I can say.
-
Ty fancied himself a molder of men but that was a fallacy. Petersen has a track record at Boise that speaks for itself. BUT the big difference is that Pete's first two recruiting classes are better than all of Ty's recruiting classes combined. And it is not even close. You can mold men all you want. You still gotta have the Jimmie's and Joe's.Ice_Holmvik said:
Ty was a molder of men who built teams the right way until he wasn't.
Fine.
Ron Zook was a great recruiter too. How did that work out?
You are going to try and compare Zook to Petersen???? Credibility denied!
It's not fair to Zook, I know. -
Ty fancied himself a molder of men but that was a fallacy. Petersen has a track record at Boise that speaks for itself. BUT the big difference is that Pete's first two recruiting classes are better than all of Ty's recruiting classes combined. And it is not even close. You can mold men all you want. You still gotta have the Jimmie's and Joe's.Ice_Holmvik said:
Ty was a molder of men who built teams the right way until he wasn't.
Fine.
Ron Zook was a great recruiter too. How did that work out?
You are going to try and compare Zook to Petersen???? Credibility denied!
Zook coached in a Rose Bowl.
It is a bad comparison -
Great quotes as always
-
@Ice_Holmvik should be the Friday sacrificephineas said:Great quotes as always
-
-
How many games did Sark win with Ty's 0-12 team (basically same players)? Next topic?TurdBuffer said:
Puppy, puppy, puppy....That's just FS and you know it. Sark left the cupboard bare in spots, no doubt, but Ty had no D worth a shit, even with good players on the team, and couldn't hold a candle to all the D studs on CP's first, well-coached defense at UW.puppylove_sugarsteel said:
Uh Turd, those are the facts. This team was on par with ty's 0-12 team when Pete took over. Cyress was that bad. This team would have won 4 games last year with Sark and maybe 5-6 next year. Those are more facts.TurdBuffer said:
Bill: You did not write Oregon State. No, you didn't. My eyes deceive me, right?Fire_Marshall_Bill said:
Oklahomo, Oregon two years in a row, virgin tech, tcu twice, georgia Oregon stTierbsHsotBoobs said:
92-12 proved that he could inherit the dominant program in the WAC and beat retards.puppylove_sugarsteel said:
Pete's #1 quality is as a sideline coach Turd. WTF, do you even watch college football? . 92-12 before he got to UW pretty much backs it up. I watched every notable game Pete coached at bsu. Simply a master in big games. Sometimes puppy just shakes his head at some of the shit that dribbles out your cunts out here (hi kim)TurdBuffer said:
True and accurate. Pac12 is way tougher, top to bottom, than the MW, where many of Pete's wins were in his pocket before the game started. Context matters for expectations.EwaDawg said:
Pete is good at developing talent. In game coaching? He can get better.dnc said:
I know you're being sarcasmic but everything you said before the final sentence is true.PurpleJ said:Yeah and we had a GREAT defense and only went 7-6 (4-5). The metrics are pointing up.
Pete sure did a hell of a job last year.
I don't understand all the hurt butts about CP. I'm a fan, and I believe we're watching him grow into a top-tier Pac12 coach. But he's not there yet so stop dumping 100% of the fault on "Sark's players" or "youth." Who brought us Smiff, huh? Maybe this is the year CP breaks through to the top of the league. Great. But he got caught with his pants down around his ankles several times in '14 and '15, because the Pac12 is way tougher to navigate week in and week out than the MW. Very seldom will there be cupcakes in Pac12 league like in the MW. And that's why CP was 92-12 and not 72-30, which is still fucking great and justifies hiring him.
Jesus Christ, are we really arguing the MW is equal in strength to the Pac12?
I like and share your optimism, Pup. But you can't keep up this "Move along, nothing to see here" about the last 15 years. We all know the difference between hype and results. Well, most of us, anyway. -
If he wins 9 games that will be an improvement in year 3, during a difficult rebuilding job. And a nice springboard into year 4, 5 and 6TierbsHsotBoobs said:
If our coach is worth having pride in, he'll win the North this year and pop off.puppylove_sugarsteel said:
Good stuff Billy, and well put. This is how dawg fans used to think. They had pride in their team, their head coach. Then boofs like J, Nacho, Race came along.Fire_Marshall_Bill said:
Nobody knows what's going to happen. That's the fucking point. Instead of just giving up and being as negative as possible for all 8 months of the offseason, I'll choose to see what happens. Signs are pointing to something better than the usual 7 or 8 win season. If not, we know CP is just another Boise CC coach who feasted on the NM States of the world. I'm on record as saying he's at least a good coach (probably not elite like Kelly or Meyer). If he's not fine. I'm wrong occasionally.TierbsHsotBoobs said:
Except he is wrong, unless you believe 4-5 > 4-5 > 5-4 > 5-4 > 5-4 > 5-4HuskyInAZ said:
You are not wrong.Fire_Marshall_Bill said:
I'm not butt hurt.m I'm Puppy's brother, remember? Some criticism is warranted and Smith probably should have been fired, and the Sark excuse (used by tons on here, but not me) is flimsy. Youth was more legitimate. I agree, he's probably 72-30 in the Pac 12.TurdBuffer said:
Bill: You did not write Oregon State. No, you didn't. My eyes deceive me, right?Fire_Marshall_Bill said:
Oklahomo, Oregon two years in a row, virgin tech, tcu twice, georgia Oregon stTierbsHsotBoobs said:
92-12 proved that he could inherit the dominant program in the WAC and beat retards.puppylove_sugarsteel said:
Pete's #1 quality is as a sideline coach Turd. WTF, do you even watch college football? . 92-12 before he got to UW pretty much backs it up. I watched every notable game Pete coached at bsu. Simply a master in big games. Sometimes puppy just shakes his head at some of the shit that dribbles out your cunts out here (hi kim)TurdBuffer said:
True and accurate. Pac12 is way tougher, top to bottom, than the MW, where many of Pete's wins were in his pocket before the game started. Context matters for expectations.EwaDawg said:
Pete is good at developing talent. In game coaching? He can get better.dnc said:
I know you're being sarcasmic but everything you said before the final sentence is true.PurpleJ said:Yeah and we had a GREAT defense and only went 7-6 (4-5). The metrics are pointing up.
Pete sure did a hell of a job last year.
I don't understand all the hurt butts about CP. I'm a fan, and I believe we're watching him grow into a top-tier Pac12 coach. But he's not there yet so stop dumping 100% of the fault on "Sark's players" or "youth." Who brought us Smiff, huh? Maybe this is the year CP breaks through to the top of the league. Great. But he got caught with his pants down around his ankles several times in '14 and '15, because the Pac12 is way tougher to navigate week in and week out than the MW. Very seldom will there be cupcakes in Pac12 league like in the MW. And that's why CP was 92-12 and not 72-30, which is still fucking great and justifies hiring him.
Jesus Christ, are we really arguing the MW is equal in strength to the Pac12?
There are people here who are just entrenched in their own narratives and thinking from 2008 or they're just trying hard to fit and be funny (usually failing) in or not rock the boat. I'm done with that shit. Tell me I'm wrong.
If not, fire Peterman and get a coach worth supporting.
