Stanford gained 284 total yards.

TTJ

This motherfucker right here can be my HC.

[Deleted User]

5 years of learning on the job has already been remarkably frustrating...

[Deleted User]

CollegeDoog said:

5 years of learning on the job has already been remarkably frustrating...

This is Sark's first year. You can't count the first four years. #FattersFS

RoadDawg55

CollegeDoog said:

5 years of learning on the job has already been remarkably frustrating...

The learning on the job is bullshit made up by Doogs. There is probably a little truth to it when it comes to dealing with the media, the AD, promotional events, etc, but I don't buy it for on field performance. Why didn't Stoops need to learn on the job? It took Chip Kelly one shitty game to learn. I doubt Florida fans forgive Muschamp for bad gameplans and losses because he needs to "learn".

I'm not a big advocate on Wilcox being our head coach because I would rather have a proven guy, but if he was, I would expect to keep on improving into a championship team.

DugtheDoog

RoadDawg55 said:

CollegeDoog said:

5 years of learning on the job has already been remarkably frustrating...

The learning on the job is bullshit made up by Doogs. There is probably a little truth to it when it comes to dealing with the media, the AD, promotional events, etc, but I don't buy it for on field performance. Why didn't Stoops need to learn on the job? It took Chip Kelly one shitty game to learn. I doubt Florida fans forgive Muschamp for bad gameplans and losses because he needs to "learn".

I'm not a big advocate on Wilcox being our head coach because I would rather have a proven guy, but if he was, I would expect to keep on improving into a championship team.

Agree. I have no idea where this whole why it's cool to bash on wilcox here, he's a damn good DC. But I'd be very mixed about him being a HC. I lived in Boise for a while and was pretty good friends with some of the former players. They all raved about Wilcox. Said he's great to play for and obviously knows his shit. Apparently he has no life and pretty much lives in the film room. I get the impression that he is definitely a details guy. He breathes football and unlike Sark, would coach a disciplined football team. That would be a huge positive. The players also told me (albeit 2 years ago) that they don't see him as a HC for a while. That could obviously change but they see him being much better suited as a DC. He has a great mind but is a very low-key guy and doesn't like attention and the limelight. While that's not a huge deal, the reality of it is you need to be a politician as much as a coach to get the egos like Bleenor to think you're they're best friend.

I'd rather go with a a proven coach but even with his downsides, I see Wilcox being a solid head coach who I doubt will be spectacular but will coach a fundamentally sound team that doesn't beat themselves.

[Deleted User]

DugtheDoog said:

RoadDawg55 said:

CollegeDoog said:

5 years of learning on the job has already been remarkably frustrating...

The learning on the job is bullshit made up by Doogs. There is probably a little truth to it when it comes to dealing with the media, the AD, promotional events, etc, but I don't buy it for on field performance. Why didn't Stoops need to learn on the job? It took Chip Kelly one shitty game to learn. I doubt Florida fans forgive Muschamp for bad gameplans and losses because he needs to "learn".

I'm not a big advocate on Wilcox being our head coach because I would rather have a proven guy, but if he was, I would expect to keep on improving into a championship team.

Agree. I have no idea where this whole why it's cool to bash on wilcox here, he's a damn good DC. But I'd be very mixed about him being a HC. I lived in Boise for a while and was pretty good friends with some of the former players. They all raved about Wilcox. Said he's great to play for and obviously knows his shit. Apparently he has no life and pretty much lives in the film room. I get the impression that he is definitely a details guy. He breathes football and unlike Sark, would coach a disciplined football team. That would be a huge positive. The players also told me (albeit 2 years ago) that they don't see him as a HC for a while. That could obviously change but they see him being much better suited as a DC. He has a great mind but is a very low-key guy and doesn't like attention and the limelight. While that's not a huge deal, the reality of it is you need to be a politician as much as a coach to get the egos like Bleenor to think you're they're best friend.

I'd rather go with a a proven coach but even with his downsides, I see Wilcox being a solid head coach who I doubt will be spectacular but will coach a fundamentally sound team that doesn't beat themselves.

I'm not a big Wilcox as head coach fan yet. Although I'll say this Wilcox resume to be a head coach IMO is much greater than Sark's back in 2008.

Now hearing he's a details guy, loves football and has no life besides football makes me think he'll be a great head coach someday.

Like I said if Wilcox goes on to some MWC, WAC or a lower level BCS school and wins I wouldn't have a problem hiring him.

I'm not against Wilcox but I'm against the idea of hiring a guy with no head coaching experience. This program is ready to win Rose Bowls right now! Time to bring in a coach who can do that.

As long as they don't go cheap they should have no problem getting a top notch coach to come here. It's painfully obvious Sark can't finish this rebuild project. He's Charlie Weis at ND, Ron Zook at Florida, Lambo in 1997/1998 at UW.

He's brought in nice talent but no way can he be the guy to lead them anywhere. The next coach will reap the rewards of his recruiting that let's be honest he wouldn't have won with anyways.

DugtheDoog

He_Needs_More_Time said:

DugtheDoog said:

RoadDawg55 said:

CollegeDoog said:

5 years of learning on the job has already been remarkably frustrating...

He's brought in nice talent but no way can he be the guy to lead them anywhere. The next coach will reap the rewards of his recruiting that let's
be honest he wouldn't have won with anyways.

The doogs will love saying (coach's name) is only winning with sark's players, especially if it's mora. Either that or they'll stab sark in the back and act like they hated him the whole time. I'd actually go with #2 but it'd be interesting to see it FPO.

Tailgater

The Wilcox name is legendary here in Boise. Justin's dad (or uncle?) Dave Wilcox played here at Boise Junior College before finishing school ball at Oregon and moving on to have a nice career in the NFL as a LB for the 49ers.

PurpleReign

Tailgater said:

The Wilcox name is legendary here in Boise. Justin's dad (or uncle?) Dave Wilcox played here at Boise Junior College before finishing school ball at Oregon and moving on to have a nice career in the NFL as a LB for the 49ers.

Do you drive trucks?

CFetters_Nacho_Lover

RoadDawg55 said:

CollegeDoog said:

5 years of learning on the job has already been remarkably frustrating...

The learning on the job is bullshit made up by Doogs. There is probably a little truth to it when it comes to dealing with the media, the AD, promotional events, etc, but I don't buy it for on field performance. Why didn't Stoops need to learn on the job? It took Chip Kelly one shitty game to learn. I doubt Florida fans forgive Muschamp for bad gameplans and losses because he needs to "learn".

I'm not a big advocate on Wilcox being our head coach because I would rather have a proven guy, but if he was, I would expect to keep on improving into a championship team.

I don't know that is actually correct. That's more of a way that HHBs have mocked Sark over the previous 4 years.

CFetters_Nacho_Lover

He_Needs_More_Time said:

DugtheDoog said:

RoadDawg55 said:

CollegeDoog said:

5 years of learning on the job has already been remarkably frustrating...

The learning on the job is bullshit made up by Doogs. There is probably a little truth to it when it comes to dealing with the media, the AD, promotional events, etc, but I don't buy it for on field performance. Why didn't Stoops need to learn on the job? It took Chip Kelly one shitty game to learn. I doubt Florida fans forgive Muschamp for bad gameplans and losses because he needs to "learn".

I'm not a big advocate on Wilcox being our head coach because I would rather have a proven guy, but if he was, I would expect to keep on improving into a championship team.

Agree. I have no idea where this whole why it's cool to bash on wilcox here, he's a damn good DC. But I'd be very mixed about him being a HC. I lived in Boise for a while and was pretty good friends with some of the former players. They all raved about Wilcox. Said he's great to play for and obviously knows his shit. Apparently he has no life and pretty much lives in the film room. I get the impression that he is definitely a details guy. He breathes football and unlike Sark, would coach a disciplined football team. That would be a huge positive. The players also told me (albeit 2 years ago) that they don't see him as a HC for a while. That could obviously change but they see him being much better suited as a DC. He has a great mind but is a very low-key guy and doesn't like attention and the limelight. While that's not a huge deal, the reality of it is you need to be a politician as much as a coach to get the egos like Bleenor to think you're they're best friend.

I'd rather go with a a proven coach but even with his downsides, I see Wilcox being a solid head coach who I doubt will be spectacular but will coach a fundamentally sound team that doesn't beat themselves.

I'm not a big Wilcox as head coach fan yet. Although I'll say this Wilcox resume to be a head coach IMO is much greater than Sark's back in 2008.

Now hearing he's a details guy, loves football and has no life besides football makes me think he'll be a great head coach someday.

Like I said if Wilcox goes on to some MWC, WAC or a lower level BCS school and wins I wouldn't have a problem hiring him.

I'm not against Wilcox but I'm against the idea of hiring a guy with no head coaching experience. This program is ready to win Rose Bowls right now! Time to bring in a coach who can do that.

As long as they don't go cheap they should have no problem getting a top notch coach to come here. It's painfully obvious Sark can't finish this rebuild project. He's Charlie Weis at ND, Ron Zook at Florida, Lambo in 1997/1998 at UW.

He's brought in nice talent but no way can he be the guy to lead them anywhere. The next coach will reap the rewards of his recruiting that let's be honest he wouldn't have won with anyways.

Doogs in 2016 "we knew Sark was a great coach. After all, the new guy just won the Rose Bowl with Sark's guys!"

TierbsHsotBoobs

Wilcox is a very good, perhaps even great DC.

We have no idea if he will be a good HC.

Passion

Wilcox has been great. I'm not sure about head coach. I'm sick of "growing pains." I could be wrong. And I LOVE his attention to detail and how he projects discipline.

And if Sark takes off for south central, let Tuisasosopo have more responsibility. Keep in mind that he was teaching the hurry-up to brett hundley at usc. I'm not sure if he is ready to be offensive coordinator, but I think he's done a good job with Price this year.

DerekJohnson

Passion said:

Wilcox has been great.

And if Sark takes off for south central, let Tuisasosopo have more responsibility. Keep in mind that he was teaching the hurry-up to brett hundley at usc. I'm not sure if he is ready to be offensive coordinator, but I think he's done a good job with Price this year.

I was thinking about this last night... Wondering how much of Tui's fire and determination have rubbed off on Price.

dnc

Passion said:

Wilcox has been great. I'm not sure about head coach. I'm sick of "growing pains." I could be wrong. And I LOVE his attention to detail and how he projects discipline.

And if Sark takes off for south central, let Tuisasosopo have more responsibility. Keep in mind that he was teaching the hurry-up to brett hundley at usc. I'm not sure if he is ready to be offensive coordinator, but I think he's done a good job with Price this year.

UCLA, but yeah. I have no idea how much impact Tui has had, but it sure seems like Price is all of a sudden back to 2011 form. The OL being somewhat better has a lot to do with that, but Price got battered like a doog who keeps thinking THIS season will be different out there on Saturday and still hung in there for a hell of a game. It's not just the OL improvement.

CFetters_Nacho_Lover

dnc said:

Passion said:

Wilcox has been great. I'm not sure about head coach. I'm sick of "growing pains." I could be wrong. And I LOVE his attention to detail and how he projects discipline.

And if Sark takes off for south central, let Tuisasosopo have more responsibility. Keep in mind that he was teaching the hurry-up to brett hundley at usc. I'm not sure if he is ready to be offensive coordinator, but I think he's done a good job with Price this year.

UCLA, but yeah. I have no idea how much impact Tui has had, but it sure seems like Price is all of a sudden back to 2011 form. The OL being somewhat better has a lot to do with that, but Price got battered like a doog who keeps thinking THIS season will be different out there on Saturday and still hung in there for a hell of a game. It's not just the OL improvement.

I don't know if you can really say there has been OL improvement

dnc

TierbsHsotBoobs said:

Wilcox is a very good, perhaps even great DC.

We have no idea if he will be a good HC.

Disagree about "no idea". I think we have a pretty good idea. He's not a sure thing, but he's a good bet IMO.

One of these days I'll get around to a research protect on the success rate of coordinators who went straight to BCS HC's, versus the success rate of hiring non BCS HC's, other BCS HC's and failed NFL HC's. My gut tells me coordinators will show better than most expect, but I can't fully endorse Wilcox until I see the data. Like I've said before, I think he's a much better bet than Sark, Lambo or Gilby were thanks to his experience and success at three different schools in three different conferences, as well as his ability to attract quality assistants. Add in the attention to detail laid out here and I think he's a very strong bet, for a coordinator.

RaceBannon

AllKobeAllHastyAllEtc proved the coordinator route is as good as the mid major head coach route. Our complaint has always been the idiots making the call

TierbsHsotBoobs

dnc said:

TierbsHsotBoobs said:

Wilcox is a very good, perhaps even great DC.

We have no idea if he will be a good HC.

Disagree about "no idea". I think we have a pretty good idea. He's not a sure thing, but he's a good bet IMO.

One of these days I'll get around to a research protect on the success rate of coordinators who went straight to BCS HC's, versus the success rate of hiring non BCS HC's, other BCS HC's and failed NFL HC's. My gut tells me coordinators will show better than most expect, but I can't fully endorse Wilcox until I see the data. Like I've said before, I think he's a much better bet than Sark, Lambo or Gilby were thanks to his experience and success at three different schools in three different conferences, as well as his ability to attract quality assistants. Add in the attention to detail laid out here and I think he's a very strong bet, for a coordinator.

On the other hand, Wilcox has chosen to work for Derek Dooley and Sark.

dnc

TierbsHsotBoobs said:

dnc said:

TierbsHsotBoobs said:

Wilcox is a very good, perhaps even great DC.

We have no idea if he will be a good HC.

Disagree about "no idea". I think we have a pretty good idea. He's not a sure thing, but he's a good bet IMO.

One of these days I'll get around to a research protect on the success rate of coordinators who went straight to BCS HC's, versus the success rate of hiring non BCS HC's, other BCS HC's and failed NFL HC's. My gut tells me coordinators will show better than most expect, but I can't fully endorse Wilcox until I see the data. Like I've said before, I think he's a much better bet than Sark, Lambo or Gilby were thanks to his experience and success at three different schools in three different conferences, as well as his ability to attract quality assistants. Add in the attention to detail laid out here and I think he's a very strong bet, for a coordinator.

On the other hand, Wilcox has chosen to work for Derek Dooley and Sark.

One way of looking at it.

The other way of looking at it is he took a job for Dooley to get SEC cred on his resume, then bailed out before Dooley got canned for more money and a chance to replace Nick Holt.

I'd say he's played his cards pretty well.

[Deleted User]

CFetters_Nacho_Lover said:

He_Needs_More_Time said:

DugtheDoog said:

RoadDawg55 said:

CollegeDoog said:

5 years of learning on the job has already been remarkably frustrating...

The learning on the job is bullshit made up by Doogs. There is probably a little truth to it when it comes to dealing with the media, the AD, promotional events, etc, but I don't buy it for on field performance. Why didn't Stoops need to learn on the job? It took Chip Kelly one shitty game to learn. I doubt Florida fans forgive Muschamp for bad gameplans and losses because he needs to "learn".

I'm not a big advocate on Wilcox being our head coach because I would rather have a proven guy, but if he was, I would expect to keep on improving into a championship team.

Agree. I have no idea where this whole why it's cool to bash on wilcox here, he's a damn good DC. But I'd be very mixed about him being a HC. I lived in Boise for a while and was pretty good friends with some of the former players. They all raved about Wilcox. Said he's great to play for and obviously knows his shit. Apparently he has no life and pretty much lives in the film room. I get the impression that he is definitely a details guy. He breathes football and unlike Sark, would coach a disciplined football team. That would be a huge positive. The players also told me (albeit 2 years ago) that they don't see him as a HC for a while. That could obviously change but they see him being much better suited as a DC. He has a great mind but is a very low-key guy and doesn't like attention and the limelight. While that's not a huge deal, the reality of it is you need to be a politician as much as a coach to get the egos like Bleenor to think you're they're best friend.

I'd rather go with a a proven coach but even with his downsides, I see Wilcox being a solid head coach who I doubt will be spectacular but will coach a fundamentally sound team that doesn't beat themselves.

I'm not a big Wilcox as head coach fan yet. Although I'll say this Wilcox resume to be a head coach IMO is much greater than Sark's back in 2008.

Now hearing he's a details guy, loves football and has no life besides football makes me think he'll be a great head coach someday.

Like I said if Wilcox goes on to some MWC, WAC or a lower level BCS school and wins I wouldn't have a problem hiring him.

I'm not against Wilcox but I'm against the idea of hiring a guy with no head coaching experience. This program is ready to win Rose Bowls right now! Time to bring in a coach who can do that.

As long as they don't go cheap they should have no problem getting a top notch coach to come here. It's painfully obvious Sark can't finish this rebuild project. He's Charlie Weis at ND, Ron Zook at Florida, Lambo in 1997/1998 at UW.

He's brought in nice talent but no way can he be the guy to lead them anywhere. The next coach will reap the rewards of his recruiting that let's be honest he wouldn't have won with anyways.

Doogs in 2016 "we knew Sark was a great coach. After all, the new guy just won the Rose Bowl with Sark's guys!"

Yep just like Doogs(before they even existed) were saying that shit in 2000 after Rick won the Rose Bowl.