Replacing a coach with a .500 conference record with a coach who has a .520 conference record is a massive waste of time.
Replacing a coach that can't beat Oregon and Stanford, with a coach that can't beat Oregon and Stanford but stumbled into a Pac 12 south title during a down Pac 12 south year is a massive waste of time.
When did Jim L. Mora lose to Oregon, LOSER?
When did he beat them? We will see Sat how good he is, I'm predicting his relative performance we be similar to his relative performance against Furd.
And no, this isn't IMALOSER.
u said can't, if u had said HASN'T that argument would've made sense, now LEAVE
It's pretty simple. Most of us want Sark gone. I'm just not on the Mora bandwagon. Sark did better against Furd than Mora did. Pretty sure Oregon will smoke Mora.
I want a HC that does better.
The reasons we don't want Pinkel, are the same reasons we don't want Mora.
It's funny of some of you clones can't think for yourselves, and have to march in lock step to a few posters here.
Replacing a coach with a .500 conference record with a coach who has a .520 conference record is a massive waste of time.
Replacing a coach that can't beat Oregon and Stanford, with a coach that can't beat Oregon and Stanford but stumbled into a Pac 12 south title during a down Pac 12 south year is a massive waste of time.
When did Jim L. Mora lose to Oregon, LOSER?
I don't care if they've played or not... How many times has Mora beaten Oregon? Yeah, that's what I thought...
Replacing a coach with a .500 conference record with a coach who has a .520 conference record is a massive waste of time.
Replacing a coach that can't beat Oregon and Stanford, with a coach that can't beat Oregon and Stanford but stumbled into a Pac 12 south title during a down Pac 12 south year is a massive waste of time.
When did Jim L. Mora lose to Oregon, LOSER?
When did he beat them? We will see Sat how good he is, I'm predicting his relative performance we be similar to his relative performance against Furd.
And no, this isn't IMALOSER.
He's going to get plungered. The dooginess over Mora on this site is a bit much. I think he has potential and has done a failrly good job so far, but some on here are as bad as Doogs are about Sark, hence why they creamed in their pants over Mora's Kick ass Presser on Brock and Danny, and linked a story about a former player donating one million to UCLA's program.
Great coaches take their program has far as the Iron Laws allow. Pinkel has taken Missouri far higher than any coach has taken that program since Dan Devine left 40 years ago. UW is a historic top 25 program, Missouri is not.
Pinkel would not have been 7-5 at UW. He would not have been a .500 coach. He would've taken Lambo's recruits to Rose Bowls in 1999, 2000, and 2001 (you realize Skippy was one win away in '99, 01) and the program would never have fallen off.
If he would leave Missouri I would take him in a heartbeat.
Great coaches take their program has far as the Iron Laws allow. Pinkel has taken Missouri far higher than any coach has taken that program since Dan Devine left 40 years ago. UW is a historic top 25 program, Missouri is not.
Pinkel would not have been 7-5 at UW. He would not have been a .500 coach. He would've taken Lambo's recruits to Rose Bowls in 1999, 2000, and 2001 (you realize Skippy was one win away in '99, 01) and the program would never have fallen off.
If he would leave Missouri I would take him in a heartbeat.
Not true. Utah would be right up there with Oregon if Urban Meyer was still their coach. Bill Snyder has taken Kansas State further than your fucktarded Iron Laws. Take your Iron Laws and shove them up your cunt.
The goal isn't to get a coach like Pinkel. It's to get a coach that can beat Oregon and take us to a fucking Rose Bowl.
Replacing a coach with a .500 conference record with a coach who has a .520 conference record is a massive waste of time.
Replacing a coach that can't beat Oregon and Stanford, with a coach that can't beat Oregon and Stanford but stumbled into a Pac 12 south title during a down Pac 12 south year is a massive waste of time.
When did Jim L. Mora lose to Oregon, LOSER?
When did he beat them? We will see Sat how good he is, I'm predicting his relative performance we be similar to his relative performance against Furd.
Great coaches take their program has far as the Iron Laws allow. Pinkel has taken Missouri far higher than any coach has taken that program since Dan Devine left 40 years ago. UW is a historic top 25 program, Missouri is not.
Pinkel would not have been 7-5 at UW. He would not have been a .500 coach. He would've taken Lambo's recruits to Rose Bowls in 1999, 2000, and 2001 (you realize Skippy was one win away in '99, 01) and the program would never have fallen off.
If he would leave Missouri I would take him in a heartbeat.
First of all this isn't factual. In 2001 the Rose Bowl was the national title game and UW was 8-3 in the regular season while Oregon was 10-1. UW had no shot at a BCS game.
In 1999 the team started off 0-2 then Rick decided to switch his entire offense to the option as he tried to win the worst Pac-10 ever.
I don't think Pinkel would have done what Rick did in 2000. That wasn't a great talented team. It had good talent but we saw teams like 1994, 1996 and 1997 achieve less with much talent.
I think Pinkel would have been exactly what Lambo was. Have a solid W-L record but would always have some bad losses.
Like Lambright had a 9-2 regular season but mostly he was a 7-4 coach. That's Gary Pinkel IMO.
Replacing a coach with a .500 conference record with a coach who has a .520 conference record is a massive waste of time.
Replacing a coach that can't beat Oregon and Stanford, with a coach that can't beat Oregon and Stanford but stumbled into a Pac 12 south title during a down Pac 12 south year is a massive waste of time.
When did Jim L. Mora lose to Oregon, LOSER?
When did he beat them? We will see Sat how good he is, I'm predicting his relative performance we be similar to his relative performance against Furd.
And no, this isn't IMALOSER.
He's going to get plungered. The dooginess over Mora on this site is a bit much. I think he has potential and has done a failrly good job so far, but some on here are as bad as Doogs are about Sark, hence why they creamed in their pants over Mora's Kick ass Presser on Brock and Danny, and linked a story about a former player donating one million to UCLA's program.
Replacing a coach with a .500 conference record with a coach who has a .520 conference record is a massive waste of time.
Replacing a coach that can't beat Oregon and Stanford, with a coach that can't beat Oregon and Stanford but stumbled into a Pac 12 south title during a down Pac 12 south year is a massive waste of time.
When did Jim L. Mora lose to Oregon, LOSER?
When did he beat them? We will see Sat how good he is, I'm predicting his relative performance we be similar to his relative performance against Furd.
And no, this isn't IMALOSER.
He's going to get plungered. The dooginess over Mora on this site is a bit much. I think he has potential and has done a failrly good job so far, but some on here are as bad as Doogs are about Sark, hence why they creamed in their pants over Mora's Kick ass Presser on Brock and Danny, and linked a story about a former player donating one million to UCLA's program.
You don't get it.
What don't I get? Explain to me what I am missing. I like Mora, just want to LIFPO before I crown him like some already have. He has beaten one team that finished the year in the top 25 (Nebraska) the past two years. What game has he won that was a "wow" game?
Great coaches take their program has far as the Iron Laws allow. Pinkel has taken Missouri far higher than any coach has taken that program since Dan Devine left 40 years ago. UW is a historic top 25 program, Missouri is not.
Pinkel would not have been 7-5 at UW. He would not have been a .500 coach. He would've taken Lambo's recruits to Rose Bowls in 1999, 2000, and 2001 (you realize Skippy was one win away in '99, 01) and the program would never have fallen off.
If he would leave Missouri I would take him in a heartbeat.
Great coaches take their program has far as the Iron Laws allow. Pinkel has taken Missouri far higher than any coach has taken that program since Dan Devine left 40 years ago. UW is a historic top 25 program, Missouri is not.
Pinkel would not have been 7-5 at UW. He would not have been a .500 coach. He would've taken Lambo's recruits to Rose Bowls in 1999, 2000, and 2001 (you realize Skippy was one win away in '99, 01) and the program would never have fallen off.
If he would leave Missouri I would take him in a heartbeat.
First of all this isn't factual. In 2001 the Rose Bowl was the national title game and UW was 8-3 in the regular season while Oregon was 10-1. UW had no shot at a BCS game.
In 1999 the team started off 0-2 then Rick decided to switch his entire offense to the option as he tried to win the worst Pac-10 ever.
I don't think Pinkel would have done what Rick did in 2000. That wasn't a great talented team. It had good talent but we saw teams like 1994, 1996 and 1997 achieve less with much talent.
I think Pinkel would have been exactly what Lambo was. Have a solid W-L record but would always have some bad losses.
Like Lambright had a 9-2 regular season but mostly he was a 7-4 coach. That's Gary Pinkel IMO.
Pinkel is definitely better than Lambo. His outperformance would have come most noticeably after the first few years.
Great coaches take their program has far as the Iron Laws allow. Pinkel has taken Missouri far higher than any coach has taken that program since Dan Devine left 40 years ago. UW is a historic top 25 program, Missouri is not.
Pinkel would not have been 7-5 at UW. He would not have been a .500 coach. He would've taken Lambo's recruits to Rose Bowls in 1999, 2000, and 2001 (you realize Skippy was one win away in '99, 01) and the program would never have fallen off.
If he would leave Missouri I would take him in a heartbeat.
First of all this isn't factual. In 2001 the Rose Bowl was the national title game and UW was 8-3 in the regular season while Oregon was 10-1. UW had no shot at a BCS game.
In 1999 the team started off 0-2 then Rick decided to switch his entire offense to the option as he tried to win the worst Pac-10 ever.
I don't think Pinkel would have done what Rick did in 2000. That wasn't a great talented team. It had good talent but we saw teams like 1994, 1996 and 1997 achieve less with much talent.
I think Pinkel would have been exactly what Lambo was. Have a solid W-L record but would always have some bad losses.
Like Lambright had a 9-2 regular season but mostly he was a 7-4 coach. That's Gary Pinkel IMO.
Pinkel is definitely better than Lambo. His outperformance would have come most noticeably after the first few years.
He is better but I think his W-L would mirror Lambo's W-L(keep in mind his is inflated due to all the talent).
I don't think Pinkel would have ever won a Rose Bowl for us.
Replacing a coach with a .500 conference record with a coach who has a .520 conference record is a massive waste of time.
Replacing a coach that can't beat Oregon and Stanford, with a coach that can't beat Oregon and Stanford but stumbled into a Pac 12 south title during a down Pac 12 south year is a massive waste of time.
When did Jim L. Mora lose to Oregon, LOSER?
When did he beat them? We will see Sat how good he is, I'm predicting his relative performance we be similar to his relative performance against Furd.
And no, this isn't IMALOSER.
He's going to get plungered. The dooginess over Mora on this site is a bit much. I think he has potential and has done a failrly good job so far, but some on here are as bad as Doogs are about Sark, hence why they creamed in their pants over Mora's Kick ass Presser on Brock and Danny, and linked a story about a former player donating one million to UCLA's program.
You don't get it.
What don't I get? Explain to me what I am missing. I like Mora, just want to LIFPO before I crown him like some already have. He has beaten one team that finished the year in the top 25 (Nebraska) the past two years. What game has he won that was a "wow" game?
You continue to look at it objectively. There is a history here.
Believe me, if it ever becomes clear that Mora isn't a great coach, we will be there saying that no one ever brings up the times when we were right. Race will write a scathing DFI calling for Mora to be fired the day after he's fired. Sven will have been as critical of Mora as anyone. You will have no idea the damage the Mora implosion did to the program.
It's been a long time, man. It's been a long fucking time. This one matters to us. Mora's our guy.
You are right. It needs to play out. But there is a history here.
Great coaches take their program has far as the Iron Laws allow. Pinkel has taken Missouri far higher than any coach has taken that program since Dan Devine left 40 years ago. UW is a historic top 25 program, Missouri is not.
Pinkel would not have been 7-5 at UW. He would not have been a .500 coach. He would've taken Lambo's recruits to Rose Bowls in 1999, 2000, and 2001 (you realize Skippy was one win away in '99, 01) and the program would never have fallen off.
If he would leave Missouri I would take him in a heartbeat.
First of all this isn't factual. In 2001 the Rose Bowl was the national title game and UW was 8-3 in the regular season while Oregon was 10-1. UW had no shot at a BCS game.
In 1999 the team started off 0-2 then Rick decided to switch his entire offense to the option as he tried to win the worst Pac-10 ever.
I don't think Pinkel would have done what Rick did in 2000. That wasn't a great talented team. It had good talent but we saw teams like 1994, 1996 and 1997 achieve less with much talent.
I think Pinkel would have been exactly what Lambo was. Have a solid W-L record but would always have some bad losses.
Like Lambright had a 9-2 regular season but mostly he was a 7-4 coach. That's Gary Pinkel IMO.
He's correct. The 2001 Rose Bowl followed the 2000 season. This was Rick's RB team. Aubs is contending that Pinkel would have made 3 straight RBs following the 98, 99, and 00 seasons.
Replacing a coach with a .500 conference record with a coach who has a .520 conference record is a massive waste of time.
Replacing a coach that can't beat Oregon and Stanford, with a coach that can't beat Oregon and Stanford but stumbled into a Pac 12 south title during a down Pac 12 south year is a massive waste of time.
When did Jim L. Mora lose to Oregon, LOSER?
When did he beat them? We will see Sat how good he is, I'm predicting his relative performance we be similar to his relative performance against Furd.
And no, this isn't IMALOSER.
He's going to get plungered. The dooginess over Mora on this site is a bit much. I think he has potential and has done a failrly good job so far, but some on here are as bad as Doogs are about Sark, hence why they creamed in their pants over Mora's Kick ass Presser on Brock and Danny, and linked a story about a former player donating one million to UCLA's program.
Dooginess? Dooginess is supporting a guy just because he's the Husky HC even though you threw a tantrum the day he got hired because Pool Boy lied to you.
Dooginess is getting behind one coach and shouting down anyone who suggests anyone else.
Dooginess is hating a guy because he dared to do his job and recruit against Washington.
The Mora love that many of us on this site share is many things, but it is nothing like dooginess.
Replacing a coach with a .500 conference record with a coach who has a .520 conference record is a massive waste of time.
Replacing a coach that can't beat Oregon and Stanford, with a coach that can't beat Oregon and Stanford but stumbled into a Pac 12 south title during a down Pac 12 south year is a massive waste of time.
When did Jim L. Mora lose to Oregon, LOSER?
When did he beat them? We will see Sat how good he is, I'm predicting his relative performance we be similar to his relative performance against Furd.
And no, this isn't IMALOSER.
He's going to get plungered. The dooginess over Mora on this site is a bit much. I think he has potential and has done a failrly good job so far, but some on here are as bad as Doogs are about Sark, hence why they creamed in their pants over Mora's Kick ass Presser on Brock and Danny, and linked a story about a former player donating one million to UCLA's program.
You don't get it.
What don't I get? Explain to me what I am missing. I like Mora, just want to LIFPO before I crown him like some already have. He has beaten one team that finished the year in the top 25 (Nebraska) the past two years. What game has he won that was a "wow" game?
Why say "the past two years" when he has only coached one season where anyone *finished* in the top 25?
Did IMYOURMOM hack your account?
You want the objective case for Mora? Here's part of it:
Let's start with the Sagarin predictor ratings (the only Sagarin ratings that matter). Here's UCLA:
UCLA's improvement under Mora has been, objectively speaking: immediate, significant, and sustained. Not to mention the sample is small but the trendline is in the right direction.
Let's talk point differential, the most important stat for any coach. In 2012 Mora had a 96 point positive differential, or 6.9 ppg. In 2013 he currently has a 124 point positive differential, or 20.67 ppg. Obviously, that's not likely to sustain with Oregon next, but it would be an upset if he doesn't finish the year with a triple digit positive differential, something UCLA has not done since 1998 and UW has not done since 2000. Of course, Mora's 96 point differential last year is already the best at either school since Rick's Rose Bowel.
Objectively, Mora's a very good college football coach.
Subjectively, he's the perfect coach for the University of Washington.
Replacing a coach with a .500 conference record with a coach who has a .520 conference record is a massive waste of time.
Replacing a coach that can't beat Oregon and Stanford, with a coach that can't beat Oregon and Stanford but stumbled into a Pac 12 south title during a down Pac 12 south year is a massive waste of time.
When did Jim L. Mora lose to Oregon, LOSER?
When did he beat them? We will see Sat how good he is, I'm predicting his relative performance we be similar to his relative performance against Furd.
And no, this isn't IMALOSER.
He's going to get plungered. The dooginess over Mora on this site is a bit much. I think he has potential and has done a failrly good job so far, but some on here are as bad as Doogs are about Sark, hence why they creamed in their pants over Mora's Kick ass Presser on Brock and Danny, and linked a story about a former player donating one million to UCLA's program.
You don't get it.
What don't I get? Explain to me what I am missing. I like Mora, just want to LIFPO before I crown him like some already have. He has beaten one team that finished the year in the top 25 (Nebraska) the past two years. What game has he won that was a "wow" game?
You continue to look at it objectively. There is a history here.
Believe me, if it ever becomes clear that Mora isn't a great coach, we will be there saying that no one ever brings up the times when we were right. Race will write a scathing DFI calling for Mora to be fired the day after he's fired. Sven will have been as critical of Mora as anyone. You will have no idea the damage the Mora implosion did to the program.
It's been a long time, man. It's been a long fucking time. This one matters to us. Mora's our guy.
You are right. It needs to play out. But there is a history here.
I will knife Mora in the back if he turns out to be just like Sark with no remorse whatsoever.
I don't know if Mora is the guy or not. Personally, I prefer the idea of the AD actually earning their fucking paychecks for once and going out and identifying a young, hungry, talented coach. You know, someone laboring in the wilds of small-time football. Like a Kent State or a Youngstown State or whatever. Someone who won't see UW as a stepping stone. Someone who will stick around for 18 or so years.
But most importantly, someone who knows how to win.
Comments
I want a HC that does better.
The reasons we don't want Pinkel, are the same reasons we don't want Mora.
It's funny of some of you clones can't think for yourselves, and have to march in lock step to a few posters here.
It is just like on Kim's bored.
*Gurgle*
The anointing he gets sometimes on this site is doogish.
Pinkel would not have been 7-5 at UW. He would not have been a .500 coach. He would've taken Lambo's recruits to Rose Bowls in 1999, 2000, and 2001 (you realize Skippy was one win away in '99, 01) and the program would never have fallen off.
If he would leave Missouri I would take him in a heartbeat.
The goal isn't to get a coach like Pinkel. It's to get a coach that can beat Oregon and take us to a fucking Rose Bowl.
In 1999 the team started off 0-2 then Rick decided to switch his entire offense to the option as he tried to win the worst Pac-10 ever.
I don't think Pinkel would have done what Rick did in 2000. That wasn't a great talented team. It had good talent but we saw teams like 1994, 1996 and 1997 achieve less with much talent.
I think Pinkel would have been exactly what Lambo was. Have a solid W-L record but would always have some bad losses.
Like Lambright had a 9-2 regular season but mostly he was a 7-4 coach. That's Gary Pinkel IMO.
I don't think Pinkel would have ever won a Rose Bowl for us.
Believe me, if it ever becomes clear that Mora isn't a great coach, we will be there saying that no one ever brings up the times when we were right. Race will write a scathing DFI calling for Mora to be fired the day after he's fired. Sven will have been as critical of Mora as anyone. You will have no idea the damage the Mora implosion did to the program.
It's been a long time, man. It's been a long fucking time. This one matters to us. Mora's our guy.
You are right. It needs to play out. But there is a history here.
Dooginess is getting behind one coach and shouting down anyone who suggests anyone else.
Dooginess is hating a guy because he dared to do his job and recruit against Washington.
The Mora love that many of us on this site share is many things, but it is nothing like dooginess.
Did IMYOURMOM hack your account?
You want the objective case for Mora? Here's part of it:
Let's start with the Sagarin predictor ratings (the only Sagarin ratings that matter). Here's UCLA:
08: 86
09: 51
10: 63
11: 70
Mora hired
12: 30
13: 12
UCLA's improvement under Mora has been, objectively speaking: immediate, significant, and sustained. Not to mention the sample is small but the trendline is in the right direction.
Let's talk point differential, the most important stat for any coach. In 2012 Mora had a 96 point positive differential, or 6.9 ppg. In 2013 he currently has a 124 point positive differential, or 20.67 ppg. Obviously, that's not likely to sustain with Oregon next, but it would be an upset if he doesn't finish the year with a triple digit positive differential, something UCLA has not done since 1998 and UW has not done since 2000. Of course, Mora's 96 point differential last year is already the best at either school since Rick's Rose Bowel.
Objectively, Mora's a very good college football coach.
Subjectively, he's the perfect coach for the University of Washington.
But most importantly, someone who knows how to win.