Mad Son's Ramblings: Year Three is Prove-It Time for Petersen

BearsWiin

puppylove_sugarsteel said:

RoadDawg55 said:

Mad_Son said:

TurdBuffer said:

Mad Dog TSIO = Too Soon. Drink heavily and relax 'til game #4. Utterly meaningless games 'til then.

TSIO is 100% not the point...

I'm a true nega dawg and fully believe we suck until proven otherwise, but I'm not dumb enough to complain about the beat down we put on Rutgers. The team dos what they had to do. We'll find out after the Arizona and Stanford games.

Its Peter's 3rd year. If he goes 9-4 thats a big improvement. A coach shouldnt be judged till his 4th-5th year. Especially a complete overhaul of a program. Been saying for 2 years, anything that happens this year is a bonus and year ahead of schedule.

Enjoy the rebuilding process. Enjoy the games, the indibidual play. If Pete wins north he'll be consensus pac12 coach of year. And deservedly so.

We elect presidents every four years. Why should a football coach get more time? Is it a harder job?

HHBruh

Pod worthy

Kaepsknee

Mad_Son said:

BlowItUp said:

wtf'd for using coach effect.

Is this because you hate quantifying things and looking at more than the win-loss column? Do you hate trying to understand root cause and to figure out what the source of the failures are? Coach Effect is a perfectly valid angle to look at performance versus recruiting. There are caveats with that but most of us are capable of understanding them...

I'd like SRS figured into the equation before I make any sort of determination.

NotTheCase

Mad_Son said:

NotTheCase said:

This is so FS, I can't believe I read it . . . "Take away those special teams touch downs, and the three long passes in the first quarter and the final score is 13-13."

Yes, take away five touchdowns and the game was close. Excellent analysis of quarters 2-4 of game that was over after 15 minutes.

So tell Ross to fair catch a kick so Gaskin can grind down the field? Tell Browning not to check deep when Ross has man coverage?

There's nothing to take from this game except they beat a shitty team and backups played. Same for the next two weeks.

Call me when Stanford comes to town.

The point is there was nothing that demonstrated consistency. The point is that while the result was good it was not as dominating as it looks. The point is it had shown us no evidence of improvement. The point is Petersen has not proven he is the one yet.

So I guess you'll be bitching after the next two games, because you can't prove anything against Idaho and PSU. Really, how much more than they blow out Rutgers?

Save your breath, drink a couple beers and realize you won't know shit about this team or coach until Stanford.

RoadDawg55

puppylove_sugarsteel said:

RoadDawg55 said:

Mad_Son said:

TurdBuffer said:

Mad Dog TSIO = Too Soon. Drink heavily and relax 'til game #4. Utterly meaningless games 'til then.

TSIO is 100% not the point...

I'm a true nega dawg and fully believe we suck until proven otherwise, but I'm not dumb enough to complain about the beat down we put on Rutgers. The team dos what they had to do. We'll find out after the Arizona and Stanford games.

Its Peter's 3rd year. If he goes 9-4 thats a big improvement. A coach shouldnt be judged till his 4th-5th year. Especially a complete overhaul of a program. Been saying for 2 years, anything that happens this year is a bonus and year ahead of schedule.

Enjoy the rebuilding process. Enjoy the games, the indibidual play. If Pete wins north he'll be consensus pac12 coach of year. And deservedly so.

How are you a great poster yet the biggest doogman piece of shit of all time? 9 and fucking 4? Who gives a flying fuck about 9-4?

Swaye

Everyone is so focused on measuring our true worth vs. Stanford. Just wait until Dick Rod finger blasts us in the desert. Another special season.

Mad_Son

NotTheCase said:

Mad_Son said:

NotTheCase said:

This is so FS, I can't believe I read it . . . "Take away those special teams touch downs, and the three long passes in the first quarter and the final score is 13-13."

Yes, take away five touchdowns and the game was close. Excellent analysis of quarters 2-4 of game that was over after 15 minutes.

So tell Ross to fair catch a kick so Gaskin can grind down the field? Tell Browning not to check deep when Ross has man coverage?

There's nothing to take from this game except they beat a shitty team and backups played. Same for the next two weeks.

Call me when Stanford comes to town.

The point is there was nothing that demonstrated consistency. The point is that while the result was good it was not as dominating as it looks. The point is it had shown us no evidence of improvement. The point is Petersen has not proven he is the one yet.

So I guess you'll be bitching after the next two games, because you can't prove anything against Idaho and PSU. Really, how much more than they blow out Rutgers?

Save your breath, drink a couple beers and realize you won't know shit about this team or coach until Stanford.

This wasn't complaining about the Rutgers game. It merely said that Petersen hasn't proven he can lead Washington to greatness and this is the season where it is time to evaluate him. We are one game into the season, we got the necessary win, but we have seen nothing to indicate he has actually transcended into the coach we need and that we will not see the issues that held us back last season.

Would you prefer I write an article saying the team looks like it had a lot of fun and who cares if the program never wins another game, there is always next year to worry about that?

Mad_Son

Swaye said:

Everyone is so focused on measuring our true worth vs. Stanford. Just wait until Dick Rod finger blasts us in the desert. Another special season.

It seems most people have anointed Petersen as our savior already. We can no longer lose except to other top 10 teams. We are elite. Hooray!

Tequilla

Mad_Son said:

NotTheCase said:

Mad_Son said:

NotTheCase said:

This is so FS, I can't believe I read it . . . "Take away those special teams touch downs, and the three long passes in the first quarter and the final score is 13-13."

Yes, take away five touchdowns and the game was close. Excellent analysis of quarters 2-4 of game that was over after 15 minutes.

So tell Ross to fair catch a kick so Gaskin can grind down the field? Tell Browning not to check deep when Ross has man coverage?

There's nothing to take from this game except they beat a shitty team and backups played. Same for the next two weeks.

Call me when Stanford comes to town.

The point is there was nothing that demonstrated consistency. The point is that while the result was good it was not as dominating as it looks. The point is it had shown us no evidence of improvement. The point is Petersen has not proven he is the one yet.

So I guess you'll be bitching after the next two games, because you can't prove anything against Idaho and PSU. Really, how much more than they blow out Rutgers?

Save your breath, drink a couple beers and realize you won't know shit about this team or coach until Stanford.

This wasn't complaining about the Rutgers game. It merely said that Petersen hasn't proven he can lead Washington to greatness and this is the season where it is time to evaluate him. We are one game into the season, we got the necessary win, but we have seen nothing to indicate he has actually transcended into the coach we need and that we will not see the issues that held us back last season.

Would you prefer I write an article saying the team looks like it had a lot of fun and who cares if the program never wins another game, there is always next year to worry about that?

As I said earlier, shit article, shit poster.

The entire article is meaningless until the Arizona game

Mad_Son

Tequilla said:

Mad_Son said:

NotTheCase said:

Mad_Son said:

NotTheCase said:

This is so FS, I can't believe I read it . . . "Take away those special teams touch downs, and the three long passes in the first quarter and the final score is 13-13."

Yes, take away five touchdowns and the game was close. Excellent analysis of quarters 2-4 of game that was over after 15 minutes.

So tell Ross to fair catch a kick so Gaskin can grind down the field? Tell Browning not to check deep when Ross has man coverage?

There's nothing to take from this game except they beat a shitty team and backups played. Same for the next two weeks.

Call me when Stanford comes to town.

The point is there was nothing that demonstrated consistency. The point is that while the result was good it was not as dominating as it looks. The point is it had shown us no evidence of improvement. The point is Petersen has not proven he is the one yet.

So I guess you'll be bitching after the next two games, because you can't prove anything against Idaho and PSU. Really, how much more than they blow out Rutgers?

Save your breath, drink a couple beers and realize you won't know shit about this team or coach until Stanford.

This wasn't complaining about the Rutgers game. It merely said that Petersen hasn't proven he can lead Washington to greatness and this is the season where it is time to evaluate him. We are one game into the season, we got the necessary win, but we have seen nothing to indicate he has actually transcended into the coach we need and that we will not see the issues that held us back last season.

Would you prefer I write an article saying the team looks like it had a lot of fun and who cares if the program never wins another game, there is always next year to worry about that?

As I said earlier, shit article, shit poster.

The entire article is meaningless until the Arizona game

No, it's not. You just don't get it. The need for Petersen to win ten games this year is valid from the day he was hired to the end of the season. He hasn't proven anything yet. The fact that you are fixated on not being able to learn anything against Rutgers is completely missing the point.