Fozzy to Stanford
Comments
-
FUCK OFF!!!bananasnblondes said:Attn: Tequila
-
You said if he was your best online recruit you have problems. Do you even listen to yourself or are you tl;dr for yourself?Tequilla said:
And how many OL do you start?RoadDawg55 said:
According to 24/7 Bainivulu is the highest rated OL Petersen has ever gotten. Higher than Adams, McGary, Roberts, and Wattenberg.Tequilla said:
Go find any place where I said that ...bananasnblondes said:
So we should go ahead and add Bainavalu to your list of husky o line recruits that don't actually count?Tequilla said:
Also pretty sure Michigan was full on the OL and he may not have had a commitable offer ... Dennis or Pepsi can probably speak better to thatbackthepack said:
He was being crooted by Michigan lol STFUTequilla said:For those that like to say 1 in 3 recruiting is good ... I'd also like to point out that where that came from was that IF there were 3 elite prospects out of SoCal, the idea being that USC would get 1, UCLA would get 1, and UW would get 1 ... and that the reason the UW prospect would be better was because he'd get better coaching and have more of a chip on his shoulder. 1 in 3 never applied to local kids.
As it pertains to OL recruiting and the 1 of 3 ...
Bainivalu SHOULD have been a slam dunk given location and that he was more of a PAC recruit than he was a national recruit.
Fozzy being an in-state kid SHOULD be a minor favorite to UW but going nationally isn't a complete shock historically ... the big miss here (assuming that he goes to Stanford) wasn't that he left but that there was at best a very small window where having any expectation that we could be in the lead was reasonable.
AVT wasn't a SoCal kid ... he was a NoCal kid. Because of that, the USC/UCLA pull SHOULD have been less ... add to it the fact that he goes to a school that not only have we recruited reasonably well as of late (see Camilo Eifler), but the HC of that school is probably on the short list of all-time Husky Legends in Nip ... this is a kid that we should have been able to win over with high end recruiting ... instead he chose USC BEFORE they had even turn things around ... that's a FAIL by us in recruiting.
What I said was that you need a strong and deep class if competing at the national level ... if he is your 3rd or 4th OL that's a GREAT class ... if he is your best probably not deep enough ...
You need more than 1 elite high end guy per class ... I know that's hard for you and a few others around here to understand. -
I wish we were taking more. I somewhat understand complaining about quantity. It's also been overblown.Tequilla said:
And how many OL do you start?RoadDawg55 said:
According to 24/7 Bainivulu is the highest rated OL Petersen has ever gotten. Higher than Adams, McGary, Roberts, and Wattenberg.Tequilla said:
Go find any place where I said that ...bananasnblondes said:
So we should go ahead and add Bainavalu to your list of husky o line recruits that don't actually count?Tequilla said:
Also pretty sure Michigan was full on the OL and he may not have had a commitable offer ... Dennis or Pepsi can probably speak better to thatbackthepack said:
He was being crooted by Michigan lol STFUTequilla said:For those that like to say 1 in 3 recruiting is good ... I'd also like to point out that where that came from was that IF there were 3 elite prospects out of SoCal, the idea being that USC would get 1, UCLA would get 1, and UW would get 1 ... and that the reason the UW prospect would be better was because he'd get better coaching and have more of a chip on his shoulder. 1 in 3 never applied to local kids.
As it pertains to OL recruiting and the 1 of 3 ...
Bainivalu SHOULD have been a slam dunk given location and that he was more of a PAC recruit than he was a national recruit.
Fozzy being an in-state kid SHOULD be a minor favorite to UW but going nationally isn't a complete shock historically ... the big miss here (assuming that he goes to Stanford) wasn't that he left but that there was at best a very small window where having any expectation that we could be in the lead was reasonable.
AVT wasn't a SoCal kid ... he was a NoCal kid. Because of that, the USC/UCLA pull SHOULD have been less ... add to it the fact that he goes to a school that not only have we recruited reasonably well as of late (see Camilo Eifler), but the HC of that school is probably on the short list of all-time Husky Legends in Nip ... this is a kid that we should have been able to win over with high end recruiting ... instead he chose USC BEFORE they had even turn things around ... that's a FAIL by us in recruiting.
What I said was that you need a strong and deep class if competing at the national level ... if he is your 3rd or 4th OL that's a GREAT class ... if he is your best probably not deep enough ...
You need more than 1 elite high end guy per class ... I know that's hard for you and a few others around here to understand.
We are losing two OL (Eldrenkamp, Brostek) before attrition. Bainivulu and Sarrell/the new plan B guy will replace. They were never taking more than 3. It's a small class. If you can't realize this is what UW coaches are doing than you are dumb.
What are you even arguing at this point? Does UW have a good OL? Are they improving? Should they be better next year? Is Strausser doing a good job?
The answers are yes, yes, yes, and yes.
As I noted in an earlier post, there doesn't seem to be anything else they could do to get Sarrell.
"Oh, fuck the on field product. Strausser didn't get Fozzy or some kid from California. If we want to be elite in 2019 we need better OL recruits."
Meanwhile our current team with an OL coached by Strausser is going to the fucking playoff. -
We're competing at a national level right now with Sark retreads and young Pete recruits.Tequilla said:
Go find any place where I said that ...bananasnblondes said:
So we should go ahead and add Bainavalu to your list of husky o line recruits that don't actually count?Tequilla said:
Also pretty sure Michigan was full on the OL and he may not have had a commitable offer ... Dennis or Pepsi can probably speak better to thatbackthepack said:
He was being crooted by Michigan lol STFUTequilla said:For those that like to say 1 in 3 recruiting is good ... I'd also like to point out that where that came from was that IF there were 3 elite prospects out of SoCal, the idea being that USC would get 1, UCLA would get 1, and UW would get 1 ... and that the reason the UW prospect would be better was because he'd get better coaching and have more of a chip on his shoulder. 1 in 3 never applied to local kids.
As it pertains to OL recruiting and the 1 of 3 ...
Bainivalu SHOULD have been a slam dunk given location and that he was more of a PAC recruit than he was a national recruit.
Fozzy being an in-state kid SHOULD be a minor favorite to UW but going nationally isn't a complete shock historically ... the big miss here (assuming that he goes to Stanford) wasn't that he left but that there was at best a very small window where having any expectation that we could be in the lead was reasonable.
AVT wasn't a SoCal kid ... he was a NoCal kid. Because of that, the USC/UCLA pull SHOULD have been less ... add to it the fact that he goes to a school that not only have we recruited reasonably well as of late (see Camilo Eifler), but the HC of that school is probably on the short list of all-time Husky Legends in Nip ... this is a kid that we should have been able to win over with high end recruiting ... instead he chose USC BEFORE they had even turn things around ... that's a FAIL by us in recruiting.
What I said was that you need a strong and deep class if competing at the national level ... if he is your 3rd or 4th OL that's a GREAT class ... if he is your best probably not deep enough ...
Everyone wants Fozzy, but everyone wants wins more. The lag effect is in full swing.
A. Minus SC we've dominated up front and babushka called a game that allowed their pass rush to tee-off.
B.Strausser doesn't get heat until his unit on the field sucks/underperforms, you know, what he's paid for. -
My point being that if he's the only elite guy that you have in a class you're likely to fall short over time because you need numbers at the position, time for players to develop, provide room to cover injuries, etc.Meek said:
You said if he was your best online recruit you have problems. Do you even listen to yourself or are you tl;dr for yourself?Tequilla said:
And how many OL do you start?RoadDawg55 said:
According to 24/7 Bainivulu is the highest rated OL Petersen has ever gotten. Higher than Adams, McGary, Roberts, and Wattenberg.Tequilla said:
Go find any place where I said that ...bananasnblondes said:
So we should go ahead and add Bainavalu to your list of husky o line recruits that don't actually count?Tequilla said:
Also pretty sure Michigan was full on the OL and he may not have had a commitable offer ... Dennis or Pepsi can probably speak better to thatbackthepack said:
He was being crooted by Michigan lol STFUTequilla said:For those that like to say 1 in 3 recruiting is good ... I'd also like to point out that where that came from was that IF there were 3 elite prospects out of SoCal, the idea being that USC would get 1, UCLA would get 1, and UW would get 1 ... and that the reason the UW prospect would be better was because he'd get better coaching and have more of a chip on his shoulder. 1 in 3 never applied to local kids.
As it pertains to OL recruiting and the 1 of 3 ...
Bainivalu SHOULD have been a slam dunk given location and that he was more of a PAC recruit than he was a national recruit.
Fozzy being an in-state kid SHOULD be a minor favorite to UW but going nationally isn't a complete shock historically ... the big miss here (assuming that he goes to Stanford) wasn't that he left but that there was at best a very small window where having any expectation that we could be in the lead was reasonable.
AVT wasn't a SoCal kid ... he was a NoCal kid. Because of that, the USC/UCLA pull SHOULD have been less ... add to it the fact that he goes to a school that not only have we recruited reasonably well as of late (see Camilo Eifler), but the HC of that school is probably on the short list of all-time Husky Legends in Nip ... this is a kid that we should have been able to win over with high end recruiting ... instead he chose USC BEFORE they had even turn things around ... that's a FAIL by us in recruiting.
What I said was that you need a strong and deep class if competing at the national level ... if he is your 3rd or 4th OL that's a GREAT class ... if he is your best probably not deep enough ...
You need more than 1 elite high end guy per class ... I know that's hard for you and a few others around here to understand.
Let's say you just get 1 elite guy every recruiting class, then you're likely always going to be in a position where you're either playing someone too early and/or playing a couple of average guys (hello Shane Brostek) that are going to get their shit pushed in against elite teams.
It's really not that hard to understand ...
The target really needs to be 2-3 elite guys per class ... not every elite player will pan out ... you want them to have time to develop before getting on the field. Considering that we've been under recruiting the last few years, you really need a class or two to make up for it to get the numbers where you need them going forward. -
We're ranked at a national level ... we haven't proven that we're competing at a national level. All that we've proven is that we're an elite team in the PAC ... nothing more or less.Doogles said:
We're competing at a national level right now with Sark retreads and young Pete recruits.Tequilla said:
Go find any place where I said that ...bananasnblondes said:
So we should go ahead and add Bainavalu to your list of husky o line recruits that don't actually count?Tequilla said:
Also pretty sure Michigan was full on the OL and he may not have had a commitable offer ... Dennis or Pepsi can probably speak better to thatbackthepack said:
He was being crooted by Michigan lol STFUTequilla said:For those that like to say 1 in 3 recruiting is good ... I'd also like to point out that where that came from was that IF there were 3 elite prospects out of SoCal, the idea being that USC would get 1, UCLA would get 1, and UW would get 1 ... and that the reason the UW prospect would be better was because he'd get better coaching and have more of a chip on his shoulder. 1 in 3 never applied to local kids.
As it pertains to OL recruiting and the 1 of 3 ...
Bainivalu SHOULD have been a slam dunk given location and that he was more of a PAC recruit than he was a national recruit.
Fozzy being an in-state kid SHOULD be a minor favorite to UW but going nationally isn't a complete shock historically ... the big miss here (assuming that he goes to Stanford) wasn't that he left but that there was at best a very small window where having any expectation that we could be in the lead was reasonable.
AVT wasn't a SoCal kid ... he was a NoCal kid. Because of that, the USC/UCLA pull SHOULD have been less ... add to it the fact that he goes to a school that not only have we recruited reasonably well as of late (see Camilo Eifler), but the HC of that school is probably on the short list of all-time Husky Legends in Nip ... this is a kid that we should have been able to win over with high end recruiting ... instead he chose USC BEFORE they had even turn things around ... that's a FAIL by us in recruiting.
What I said was that you need a strong and deep class if competing at the national level ... if he is your 3rd or 4th OL that's a GREAT class ... if he is your best probably not deep enough ...
Everyone wants Fozzy, but everyone wants wins more. The lag effect is in full swing.
A. Minus SC we've dominated up front and babushka called a game that allowed their pass rush to tee-off.
B.Strausser doesn't get heat until his unit on the field sucks/underperforms, you know, what he's paid for.
The only team that we've played on our schedule with the kind of elite talent on the DL that could give us problems was USC. Sure, you can blame Babushka for a shitty game called on offense and that's fair. That doesn't hide the fact that the OL was in trouble all night.
I've also supported Strausser in the past for his on-field results not only at UW but at Boise ... unlike Pease and the results he had here. But the reality is that OL recruiting is falling behind that of the rest of the team in terms of results.
Is that enough to want to make a change from Strausser? Absolutely not. But at the same time, not acknowledging that the recruiting here needs to get better to match the rest of the roster and that this needs to be emphasized in the 2018 class is also being foolish. -
you are trying to be the general manager of a fantasy team that doesn't exist. just be happy and accept some of the shit that is part of the process.
-
Look, I get it. Stars matter and I'm very well versed on the success correlation of recruiting class rankings and on field success.Tequilla said:
We're ranked at a national level ... we haven't proven that we're competing at a national level. All that we've proven is that we're an elite team in the PAC ... nothing more or less.Doogles said:
We're competing at a national level right now with Sark retreads and young Pete recruits.Tequilla said:
Go find any place where I said that ...bananasnblondes said:
So we should go ahead and add Bainavalu to your list of husky o line recruits that don't actually count?Tequilla said:
Also pretty sure Michigan was full on the OL and he may not have had a commitable offer ... Dennis or Pepsi can probably speak better to thatbackthepack said:
He was being crooted by Michigan lol STFUTequilla said:For those that like to say 1 in 3 recruiting is good ... I'd also like to point out that where that came from was that IF there were 3 elite prospects out of SoCal, the idea being that USC would get 1, UCLA would get 1, and UW would get 1 ... and that the reason the UW prospect would be better was because he'd get better coaching and have more of a chip on his shoulder. 1 in 3 never applied to local kids.
As it pertains to OL recruiting and the 1 of 3 ...
Bainivalu SHOULD have been a slam dunk given location and that he was more of a PAC recruit than he was a national recruit.
Fozzy being an in-state kid SHOULD be a minor favorite to UW but going nationally isn't a complete shock historically ... the big miss here (assuming that he goes to Stanford) wasn't that he left but that there was at best a very small window where having any expectation that we could be in the lead was reasonable.
AVT wasn't a SoCal kid ... he was a NoCal kid. Because of that, the USC/UCLA pull SHOULD have been less ... add to it the fact that he goes to a school that not only have we recruited reasonably well as of late (see Camilo Eifler), but the HC of that school is probably on the short list of all-time Husky Legends in Nip ... this is a kid that we should have been able to win over with high end recruiting ... instead he chose USC BEFORE they had even turn things around ... that's a FAIL by us in recruiting.
What I said was that you need a strong and deep class if competing at the national level ... if he is your 3rd or 4th OL that's a GREAT class ... if he is your best probably not deep enough ...
Everyone wants Fozzy, but everyone wants wins more. The lag effect is in full swing.
A. Minus SC we've dominated up front and babushka called a game that allowed their pass rush to tee-off.
B.Strausser doesn't get heat until his unit on the field sucks/underperforms, you know, what he's paid for.
The only team that we've played on our schedule with the kind of elite talent on the DL that could give us problems was USC. Sure, you can blame Babushka for a shitty game called on offense and that's fair. That doesn't hide the fact that the OL was in trouble all night.
I've also supported Strausser in the past for his on-field results not only at UW but at Boise ... unlike Pease and the results he had here. But the reality is that OL recruiting is falling behind that of the rest of the team in terms of results.
Is that enough to want to make a change from Strausser? Absolutely not. But at the same time, not acknowledging that the recruiting here needs to get better to match the rest of the roster and that this needs to be emphasized in the 2018 class is also being foolish.
The anomaly has been Petersen and the NFL talent he has produced at Boise, all things considered, we're winning.
Stop stirring up drama for your podcast with less than 9 listeners (me included) to prove you're hard.
This is some Petty Kim Shit. -
A lot of people on this thread don't know shit about fozzy or his mom. LOL
If he chooses UW, great, will bolster our line most likely. If not, we better develop other kids. We can't win every recruit we want. -
.... and what's your point? Of course we don't ... we just speculate and talk stupid shit about young men who we hope go UW.2001400ex said:A lot of people on this thread don't know shit about fozzy or his mom. LOL
If he chooses UW, great, will bolster our line most likely. If not, we better develop other kids. We can't win every recruit we want.
Are you missing the whole point about this place?
