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.
Options

Foster Sarell, we got a shot with him?

145791021

Comments

  • Options
    BasemanBaseman Member Posts: 12,365
    “There are definitely probably some similar situations with that last recruitment between Stanford and UW,” Sarell said of the battle for Garnett, adding that he hears the pitch to stay home from just about everyone locally. “Everybody is always talking about keeping guys in state, stay at home and play for the home crowd.”

    As for this Stanford-Washington game, it won’t do much to sway Sarell’s thoughts about either program.

    “I don’t know if there’s anything I can get out of the game,” Sarell said. “I understand both programs really well -- where they’re headed and what they’re doing. Both teams are great.”
  • Options
    dhdawgdhdawg Member Posts: 13,326
    Passion said:

    dhdawg said:

    ESPN just had an article about him where he said "the UW/Stanford game outcome didn't mean fuckin' shit to me, bro"(paraphrasing)

    if that really is the case, I guess there wasn't really anything pete could have done.
    Yah, except have a better recruiter as your OL coach.
    sure. would have helped. but the best recruiting tool is supposed to be on field success, and he clearly doesn't give a shit about it in this case
  • Options
    whatshouldicareaboutwhatshouldicareabout Member Posts: 12,539
    He's got to be a special kind of loser if he wants to join Stanford after watching that game
  • Options
    dncdnc Member Posts: 56,614
    Passion said:

    dhdawg said:

    ESPN just had an article about him where he said "the UW/Stanford game outcome didn't mean fuckin' shit to me, bro"(paraphrasing)

    if that really is the case, I guess there wasn't really anything pete could have done.
    Yah, except have a better OL coach as your OL coach.
  • Options
    dncdnc Member Posts: 56,614

    dnc said:

    Recruiting lag theory says this game was never going to mean anything for 2017 recruits. These kids have mostly made up their minds, or have narrowed it down past simply on field results. Winning or losing that game is not going to sway many kids for this year.

    It probably made a big impression for next year though.

    Sorrell is going to kick ass at Stanford and everyone who WDWHA'd him is going to look fucking stupid, as always.

    Most of the people WDWHAing (like myself) are doing so ironically and out of spite for the whole stupid recruiting process. So there, or something.
    #Courageous
  • Options
    Mad_SonMad_Son Member Posts: 10,132
    He is definitely going to Stanford. Garnett is in his head. Garnett had every reason at the time to leave Sark and now he has every reason to recruit Sarell. I don't know anything about Sarell other than his age so while he doesn't represent the population as a whole, best guess is he does not value loyalty the way the older people giving him advice do. Odds are he values going off and doing your own thing just like Josh Garnett.

    If he goes to Stanford he will be the next Trevor Guyton, which is fine, that is his choice. In five years when he whines in the Seattle Times about he left town and never beat the Huskies I will laugh. He'll still play in the NFL whichever school he chooses so it's really about the other factors.
  • Options
    CuntWaffleCuntWaffle Member Posts: 22,493
    Some kids just have it pre determined they are going out of state for college. It's cool to travel far away where your from to play sports. It's pretty retarded but getting away from WA is some kids priority.
  • Options
    dhdawgdhdawg Member Posts: 13,326
    Meek said:

    dhdawg said:

    Passion said:

    dhdawg said:

    ESPN just had an article about him where he said "the UW/Stanford game outcome didn't mean fuckin' shit to me, bro"(paraphrasing)

    if that really is the case, I guess there wasn't really anything pete could have done.
    Yah, except have a better recruiter as your OL coach.
    sure. would have helped. but the best recruiting tool is supposed to be on field success, and he clearly doesn't give a shit about it in this case
    Oh right because one big win in 15 years means we're a powerhouse program.

    The kid has been ready for Stanford for months and has been giving us a courtesy flush here instead of the cold shoulder. He's polite and respectful and is probably 98% certain in his decision. He's got the kind of ranking that allows him to time it when he wants to. Just let it be man.
    notice how I said Petersen, not UW. is the program as a whole responsible for their failures, yes. Is Petersen responsible? very little if at all
  • Options
    dhdawgdhdawg Member Posts: 13,326
    Swaye said:

    dhdawg said:

    Passion said:

    dhdawg said:

    ESPN just had an article about him where he said "the UW/Stanford game outcome didn't mean fuckin' shit to me, bro"(paraphrasing)

    if that really is the case, I guess there wasn't really anything pete could have done.
    Yah, except have a better recruiter as your OL coach.
    sure. would have helped. but the best recruiting tool is supposed to be on field success, and he clearly doesn't give a shit about it in this case
    Not sure if serious? We beat them twice in like 9 fucking years, and they have won the conference like 4 out of the 5 last years? If he is picking for on field success you pick Tree every fucking time, until something lasting and permanent changes, which it hasn't as of yet.
    You're right. I could have phrased that better. My point is if hee making this decision off of the last 9 years he'd be right to choose stanford, and I'm not sure how much Petersen could have done if that is the case
  • Options
    TequillaTequilla Member Posts: 19,822
    When you have a kid that has the option of going to the team that he views as an annual conference contender that will win 10+ games each year, with coaching that has a track record of putting OL not only in the NFL but high round picks, and add to that a Stanford education that's an uphill battle to fight when in the process of turning a program around.

    Now, if you're reading the tea leaves going forward, I'd be more likely to buy UW stock than Tree stock ... but to expect a 17-18 year old kid to do that ... probably not.
  • Options
    BasemanBaseman Member Posts: 12,365
    Garnett thought we sucked. We did. We suck less now.

    Stanford is cool. Their Poasters speak of nonsensical quicksand, us? "Such Fag J" - I guess WE are cool after all.

    At the end of the day, Peterman and crew need to close Fozzy.

    Coaching up elite prospects is better than coaching up shittier prospects. That's what THEY say anyway.
  • Options
    PurpleReignPurpleReign Member Posts: 5,457
    Baseman said:

    Garnett thought we sucked. We did. We suck less now.

    Stanford is cool. Their Poasters speak of nonsensical quicksand, us? "Such Fag J" - I guess WE are cool after all.

    At the end of the day, Peterman and crew need to close Fozzy.

    Coaching up elite prospects is better than coaching up shittier prospects. That's what THEY say anyway.

    I learned a lot about math and words in my time on TheCardBoard.
Sign In or Register to comment.