Bellotti won the Fiesta Bowel, owns 4 10-win seasons, 2 conference titles and beat the best UW team since the 1991 squad.
I know it's fun to call him "Mediocre Mike" around here, but he'd be either the best or second best coach in the league if he were coaching in the PAC now.
He's mediocre compared to Kelly, but so is everyone else in this league and most of college football save Saban or Urbz.
1 outright conference championship and 1/3 of a conference championship in 14 years on the job (11 of those 14 years in a ten team conference) makes him nothing but mediocre.
1 top 5 finish in 14 years on the job makes him nothing but mediocre.
1 meaningful bowel win in 14 years makes him nothing but mediocre.
A worse conference winning percentage than Jim Lambright makes him nothing but mediocre.
He's mediocre Mike because he was mediocre.
Best coach in the conference if he was coaching today my ass.
Your better than this.
To me "Mediocre" is a C. "Good" is a B, and "Excellent" is an A.
Coaching in the league kind of sucks right now. There's no Carrolls, Harbaughs, un-burned out Tedfords, kings of Poop Island, or good Dennis Ericksons right now.
Bellotti was a B coach with a couple of B+ years. He got good results from the talent he had, usually overperformed his recruiting, and learned from his mistakes.
At major conference programs, Bellotti and Peterman have averaged about 9 wins per season, and Bellotti did it with one fewer game than Peterman, for the most part.
Bellotti had one losing record in 14 seasons at a program that had finished below .500 in 18 of the previous 30 years before he became head coach.
And Peterman's finished top 25 7 times, same as Iron Mike, over roughly the same amount of tim.
So who in the league would be better? Peterman? Shaw? the Pirate?
Peterman and Shaw are probably better than Iron Mike but not be a super-wide margin, and Shaw is Shaw. We're going to see what Peterman is really made of over the next 2-3 years.
Holy quook alert. Pete has a better winning percentage "at major programs" despite winning the same amount of games per year and getting an extra game.
Your narrative sucks harder than your maff.
Oh and they both coached before they were at a major program and Pete > Bellotti there.
If you really think the average of Pete's first four years at UW is the average of what he'll accomplish at UW then sure, he's about Bellotti's level of a mediocre coach.
Sure.gif
UW Pete has as many top 5 finishes as Bellotti did in 11 less years.
UW Pete has as many outright conference titles as Bellotti did in 11 years.
Overall Pete has more BCS wins than Bellotti did in two less years (and that's just counting Bellotti at Oregon).
Only a Quook would look at their resumes and say they're on the same level.
Once again, your better than this.
Is Peterman the best coach in this league?
If you believe he is or if he’s in the top 2, AZ isn’t far off in his analysis.
You would have to agree with that. There’s literally no argument.
#whitebellotti
I believe Pete is the best coach in the league but if his next four years match his first four years (slightly better than Bellotti) I'll be very disappointed.
I'd take David Shaw over Bellotti in a heartbeat.
I don't believe Bellotti could do what Leach has done at WSU.
There's plenty of argument.
So I guess you’re making the assumption that Peterman would do better than Real Bellotti at WSU? I don’t think Shaw would do better than Leach at WSU which is basically nothing other than staying out of last place so far.
On another note the same year Real Bellotti won his only outright title Real Pete Carroll entered the PAC. We all know what came next.
Will be interesting to see how White Bellotti contends with Gay Pete Carroll should that deal get done.
Bellotti won the Fiesta Bowel, owns 4 10-win seasons, 2 conference titles and beat the best UW team since the 1991 squad.
I know it's fun to call him "Mediocre Mike" around here, but he'd be either the best or second best coach in the league if he were coaching in the PAC now.
He's mediocre compared to Kelly, but so is everyone else in this league and most of college football save Saban or Urbz.
1 outright conference championship and 1/3 of a conference championship in 14 years on the job (11 of those 14 years in a ten team conference) makes him nothing but mediocre.
1 top 5 finish in 14 years on the job makes him nothing but mediocre.
1 meaningful bowel win in 14 years makes him nothing but mediocre.
A worse conference winning percentage than Jim Lambright makes him nothing but mediocre.
He's mediocre Mike because he was mediocre.
Best coach in the conference if he was coaching today my ass.
Your better than this.
To me "Mediocre" is a C. "Good" is a B, and "Excellent" is an A.
Coaching in the league kind of sucks right now. There's no Carrolls, Harbaughs, un-burned out Tedfords, kings of Poop Island, or good Dennis Ericksons right now.
Bellotti was a B coach with a couple of B+ years. He got good results from the talent he had, usually overperformed his recruiting, and learned from his mistakes.
At major conference programs, Bellotti and Peterman have averaged about 9 wins per season, and Bellotti did it with one fewer game than Peterman, for the most part.
Bellotti had one losing record in 14 seasons at a program that had finished below .500 in 18 of the previous 30 years before he became head coach.
And Peterman's finished top 25 7 times, same as Iron Mike, over roughly the same amount of tim.
So who in the league would be better? Peterman? Shaw? the Pirate?
Peterman and Shaw are probably better than Iron Mike but not be a super-wide margin, and Shaw is Shaw. We're going to see what Peterman is really made of over the next 2-3 years.
Holy quook alert. Pete has a better winning percentage "at major programs" despite winning the same amount of games per year and getting an extra game.
Your narrative sucks harder than your maff.
Oh and they both coached before they were at a major program and Pete > Bellotti there.
If you really think the average of Pete's first four years at UW is the average of what he'll accomplish at UW then sure, he's about Bellotti's level of a mediocre coach.
Sure.gif
UW Pete has as many top 5 finishes as Bellotti did in 11 less years.
UW Pete has as many outright conference titles as Bellotti did in 11 years.
Overall Pete has more BCS wins than Bellotti did in two less years (and that's just counting Bellotti at Oregon).
Only a Quook would look at their resumes and say they're on the same level.
Once again, your better than this.
Is Peterman the best coach in this league?
If you believe he is or if he’s in the top 2, AZ isn’t far off in his analysis.
You would have to agree with that. There’s literally no argument.
#whitebellotti
I believe Pete is the best coach in the league but if his next four years match his first four years (slightly better than Bellotti) I'll be very disappointed.
I'd take David Shaw over Bellotti in a heartbeat.
I don't believe Bellotti could do what Leach has done at WSU.
There's plenty of argument.
So I guess you’re making the assumption that Peterman would do better than Real Bellotti at WSU? I don’t think Shaw would do better than Leach at WSU which is basically nothing other than staying out of last place so far.
On another note the same year Real Bellotti won his only outright title Real Pete Carroll entered the PAC. We all know what came next.
Will be interesting to see how White Bellotti contends with Gay Pete Carroll should that deal get done.
Bellotti won the Fiesta Bowel, owns 4 10-win seasons, 2 conference titles and beat the best UW team since the 1991 squad.
I know it's fun to call him "Mediocre Mike" around here, but he'd be either the best or second best coach in the league if he were coaching in the PAC now.
He's mediocre compared to Kelly, but so is everyone else in this league and most of college football save Saban or Urbz.
1 outright conference championship and 1/3 of a conference championship in 14 years on the job (11 of those 14 years in a ten team conference) makes him nothing but mediocre.
1 top 5 finish in 14 years on the job makes him nothing but mediocre.
1 meaningful bowel win in 14 years makes him nothing but mediocre.
A worse conference winning percentage than Jim Lambright makes him nothing but mediocre.
He's mediocre Mike because he was mediocre.
Best coach in the conference if he was coaching today my ass.
Your better than this.
To me "Mediocre" is a C. "Good" is a B, and "Excellent" is an A.
Coaching in the league kind of sucks right now. There's no Carrolls, Harbaughs, un-burned out Tedfords, kings of Poop Island, or good Dennis Ericksons right now.
Bellotti was a B coach with a couple of B+ years. He got good results from the talent he had, usually overperformed his recruiting, and learned from his mistakes.
At major conference programs, Bellotti and Peterman have averaged about 9 wins per season, and Bellotti did it with one fewer game than Peterman, for the most part.
Bellotti had one losing record in 14 seasons at a program that had finished below .500 in 18 of the previous 30 years before he became head coach.
And Peterman's finished top 25 7 times, same as Iron Mike, over roughly the same amount of tim.
So who in the league would be better? Peterman? Shaw? the Pirate?
Peterman and Shaw are probably better than Iron Mike but not be a super-wide margin, and Shaw is Shaw. We're going to see what Peterman is really made of over the next 2-3 years.
Holy quook alert. Pete has a better winning percentage "at major programs" despite winning the same amount of games per year and getting an extra game.
Your narrative sucks harder than your maff.
Oh and they both coached before they were at a major program and Pete > Bellotti there.
If you really think the average of Pete's first four years at UW is the average of what he'll accomplish at UW then sure, he's about Bellotti's level of a mediocre coach.
Sure.gif
UW Pete has as many top 5 finishes as Bellotti did in 11 less years.
UW Pete has as many outright conference titles as Bellotti did in 11 years.
Overall Pete has more BCS wins than Bellotti did in two less years (and that's just counting Bellotti at Oregon).
Only a Quook would look at their resumes and say they're on the same level.
Once again, your better than this.
Is Peterman the best coach in this league?
If you believe he is or if he’s in the top 2, AZ isn’t far off in his analysis.
You would have to agree with that. There’s literally no argument.
#whitebellotti
I believe Pete is the best coach in the league but if his next four years match his first four years (slightly better than Bellotti) I'll be very disappointed.
I'd take David Shaw over Bellotti in a heartbeat.
I don't believe Bellotti could do what Leach has done at WSU.
There's plenty of argument.
So I guess you’re making the assumption that Peterman would do better than Real Bellotti at WSU? I don’t think Shaw would do better than Leach at WSU which is basically nothing other than staying out of last place so far.
On another note the same year Real Bellotti won his only outright title Real Pete Carroll entered the PAC. We all know what came next.
Will be interesting to see how White Bellotti contends with Gay Pete Carroll should that deal get done.
Yes. Bellotti finished 8th in the conference.
Fucking Carroll.
And finished 2nd twice. 2005 10-2 (7-1) 2008 10-3 (7-2) and also we would have won the world championship in 2007 had Dennis Dixon not blown his face off vs ASU.
This thread reminded me that I don't miss the arguments over Bellotti after all
AZ did make one point saying he would be concerned if he were a Husky fan after this year.
I'm always concerned for one thing but in my frame of reference he is right on schedule. A dip is OK and we'll wait for the final record to see how much, because he came in and won by year three which is always our first barometer, with Joe Fuckface's players.
In other words he wasn't crying for more time
Now he's dealing with the holes in his recruiting and building the next wave. With divisions its a little tricky but James' big claim to fame was 18 years of finishing first or second most years. Almost all of them.
Compared to Saban at Bama who got it rolling and it hasn't stopped, then yeah, some concern. Compared to what Washington can do when SERIOUS about football right on track
We have the recruiting nerds and internet warriors we need to keep him honest
This thread reminded me that I don't miss the arguments over Bellotti after all
AZ did make one point saying he would be concerned if he were a Husky fan after this year.
I'm always concerned for one thing but in my frame of reference he is right on schedule. A dip is OK and we'll wait for the final record to see how much, because he came in and won by year three which is always our first barometer, with Joe Fuckface's players.
In other words he wasn't crying for more time
Now he's dealing with the holes in his recruiting and building the next wave. With divisions its a little tricky but James' big claim to fame was 18 years of finishing first or second most years. Almost all of them.
Compared to Saban at Bama who got it rolling and it hasn't stopped, then yeah, some concern. Compared to what Washington can do when SERIOUS about football right on track
We have the recruiting nerds and internet warriors we need to keep him honest
Sounds like one day you can become as good as Boise state
Bellotti won the Fiesta Bowel, owns 4 10-win seasons, 2 conference titles and beat the best UW team since the 1991 squad.
I know it's fun to call him "Mediocre Mike" around here, but he'd be either the best or second best coach in the league if he were coaching in the PAC now.
He's mediocre compared to Kelly, but so is everyone else in this league and most of college football save Saban or Urbz.
1 outright conference championship and 1/3 of a conference championship in 14 years on the job (11 of those 14 years in a ten team conference) makes him nothing but mediocre.
1 top 5 finish in 14 years on the job makes him nothing but mediocre.
1 meaningful bowel win in 14 years makes him nothing but mediocre.
A worse conference winning percentage than Jim Lambright makes him nothing but mediocre.
He's mediocre Mike because he was mediocre.
Best coach in the conference if he was coaching today my ass.
Your better than this.
To me "Mediocre" is a C. "Good" is a B, and "Excellent" is an A.
Coaching in the league kind of sucks right now. There's no Carrolls, Harbaughs, un-burned out Tedfords, kings of Poop Island, or good Dennis Ericksons right now.
Bellotti was a B coach with a couple of B+ years. He got good results from the talent he had, usually overperformed his recruiting, and learned from his mistakes.
At major conference programs, Bellotti and Peterman have averaged about 9 wins per season, and Bellotti did it with one fewer game than Peterman, for the most part.
Bellotti had one losing record in 14 seasons at a program that had finished below .500 in 18 of the previous 30 years before he became head coach.
And Peterman's finished top 25 7 times, same as Iron Mike, over roughly the same amount of tim.
So who in the league would be better? Peterman? Shaw? the Pirate?
Peterman and Shaw are probably better than Iron Mike but not be a super-wide margin, and Shaw is Shaw. We're going to see what Peterman is really made of over the next 2-3 years.
Holy quook alert. Pete has a better winning percentage "at major programs" despite winning the same amount of games per year and getting an extra game.
Your narrative sucks harder than your maff.
Oh and they both coached before they were at a major program and Pete > Bellotti there.
If you really think the average of Pete's first four years at UW is the average of what he'll accomplish at UW then sure, he's about Bellotti's level of a mediocre coach.
Sure.gif
UW Pete has as many top 5 finishes as Bellotti did in 11 less years.
UW Pete has as many outright conference titles as Bellotti did in 11 years.
Overall Pete has more BCS wins than Bellotti did in two less years (and that's just counting Bellotti at Oregon).
Only a Quook would look at their resumes and say they're on the same level.
Once again, your better than this.
No, no he's not
Guys like AZ normally have barely perceptible quook levels, but UW losing brings them out. They can't help it, its like a werewolf in a full moon.
This thread reminded me that I don't miss the arguments over Bellotti after all
AZ did make one point saying he would be concerned if he were a Husky fan after this year.
I'm always concerned for one thing but in my frame of reference he is right on schedule. A dip is OK and we'll wait for the final record to see how much, because he came in and won by year three which is always our first barometer, with Joe Fuckface's players.
In other words he wasn't crying for more time
Now he's dealing with the holes in his recruiting and building the next wave. With divisions its a little tricky but James' big claim to fame was 18 years of finishing first or second most years. Almost all of them.
Compared to Saban at Bama who got it rolling and it hasn't stopped, then yeah, some concern. Compared to what Washington can do when SERIOUS about football right on track
We have the recruiting nerds and internet warriors we need to keep him honest
Bellotti won the Fiesta Bowel, owns 4 10-win seasons, 2 conference titles and beat the best UW team since the 1991 squad.
I know it's fun to call him "Mediocre Mike" around here, but he'd be either the best or second best coach in the league if he were coaching in the PAC now.
He's mediocre compared to Kelly, but so is everyone else in this league and most of college football save Saban or Urbz.
1 outright conference championship and 1/3 of a conference championship in 14 years on the job (11 of those 14 years in a ten team conference) makes him nothing but mediocre.
1 top 5 finish in 14 years on the job makes him nothing but mediocre.
1 meaningful bowel win in 14 years makes him nothing but mediocre.
A worse conference winning percentage than Jim Lambright makes him nothing but mediocre.
He's mediocre Mike because he was mediocre.
Best coach in the conference if he was coaching today my ass.
Your better than this.
To me "Mediocre" is a C. "Good" is a B, and "Excellent" is an A.
Coaching in the league kind of sucks right now. There's no Carrolls, Harbaughs, un-burned out Tedfords, kings of Poop Island, or good Dennis Ericksons right now.
Bellotti was a B coach with a couple of B+ years. He got good results from the talent he had, usually overperformed his recruiting, and learned from his mistakes.
At major conference programs, Bellotti and Peterman have averaged about 9 wins per season, and Bellotti did it with one fewer game than Peterman, for the most part.
Bellotti had one losing record in 14 seasons at a program that had finished below .500 in 18 of the previous 30 years before he became head coach.
And Peterman's finished top 25 7 times, same as Iron Mike, over roughly the same amount of tim.
So who in the league would be better? Peterman? Shaw? the Pirate?
Peterman and Shaw are probably better than Iron Mike but not be a super-wide margin, and Shaw is Shaw. We're going to see what Peterman is really made of over the next 2-3 years.
Holy quook alert. Pete has a better winning percentage "at major programs" despite winning the same amount of games per year and getting an extra game.
Your narrative sucks harder than your maff.
Oh and they both coached before they were at a major program and Pete > Bellotti there.
If you really think the average of Pete's first four years at UW is the average of what he'll accomplish at UW then sure, he's about Bellotti's level of a mediocre coach.
Sure.gif
UW Pete has as many top 5 finishes as Bellotti did in 11 less years.
UW Pete has as many outright conference titles as Bellotti did in 11 years.
Overall Pete has more BCS wins than Bellotti did in two less years (and that's just counting Bellotti at Oregon).
Only a Quook would look at their resumes and say they're on the same level.
Once again, your better than this.
No, no he's not
Guys like AZ normally have barely perceptible quook levels, but UW losing brings them out. They can't help it, its like a werewolf in a full moon.
Oh for fucks sake.
There’s still cum stains on the inside of my monitor from when Oregon lost to Stanford in 2012.
This thread reminded me that I don't miss the arguments over Bellotti after all
AZ did make one point saying he would be concerned if he were a Husky fan after this year.
I'm always concerned for one thing but in my frame of reference he is right on schedule. A dip is OK and we'll wait for the final record to see how much, because he came in and won by year three which is always our first barometer, with Joe Fuckface's players.
In other words he wasn't crying for more time
Now he's dealing with the holes in his recruiting and building the next wave. With divisions its a little tricky but James' big claim to fame was 18 years of finishing first or second most years. Almost all of them.
Compared to Saban at Bama who got it rolling and it hasn't stopped, then yeah, some concern. Compared to what Washington can do when SERIOUS about football right on track
We have the recruiting nerds and internet warriors we need to keep him honest
I agree with this - unless the holes don't get filled
Bellotti won the Fiesta Bowel, owns 4 10-win seasons, 2 conference titles and beat the best UW team since the 1991 squad.
I know it's fun to call him "Mediocre Mike" around here, but he'd be either the best or second best coach in the league if he were coaching in the PAC now.
He's mediocre compared to Kelly, but so is everyone else in this league and most of college football save Saban or Urbz.
1 outright conference championship and 1/3 of a conference championship in 14 years on the job (11 of those 14 years in a ten team conference) makes him nothing but mediocre.
1 top 5 finish in 14 years on the job makes him nothing but mediocre.
1 meaningful bowel win in 14 years makes him nothing but mediocre.
A worse conference winning percentage than Jim Lambright makes him nothing but mediocre.
He's mediocre Mike because he was mediocre.
Best coach in the conference if he was coaching today my ass.
Your better than this.
To me "Mediocre" is a C. "Good" is a B, and "Excellent" is an A.
Coaching in the league kind of sucks right now. There's no Carrolls, Harbaughs, un-burned out Tedfords, kings of Poop Island, or good Dennis Ericksons right now.
Bellotti was a B coach with a couple of B+ years. He got good results from the talent he had, usually overperformed his recruiting, and learned from his mistakes.
At major conference programs, Bellotti and Peterman have averaged about 9 wins per season, and Bellotti did it with one fewer game than Peterman, for the most part.
Bellotti had one losing record in 14 seasons at a program that had finished below .500 in 18 of the previous 30 years before he became head coach.
And Peterman's finished top 25 7 times, same as Iron Mike, over roughly the same amount of tim.
So who in the league would be better? Peterman? Shaw? the Pirate?
Peterman and Shaw are probably better than Iron Mike but not be a super-wide margin, and Shaw is Shaw. We're going to see what Peterman is really made of over the next 2-3 years.
Holy quook alert. Pete has a better winning percentage "at major programs" despite winning the same amount of games per year and getting an extra game.
Your narrative sucks harder than your maff.
Oh and they both coached before they were at a major program and Pete > Bellotti there.
If you really think the average of Pete's first four years at UW is the average of what he'll accomplish at UW then sure, he's about Bellotti's level of a mediocre coach.
Sure.gif
UW Pete has as many top 5 finishes as Bellotti did in 11 less years.
UW Pete has as many outright conference titles as Bellotti did in 11 years.
Overall Pete has more BCS wins than Bellotti did in two less years (and that's just counting Bellotti at Oregon).
Only a Quook would look at their resumes and say they're on the same level.
Once again, your better than this.
No, no he's not
Guys like AZ normally have barely perceptible quook levels, but UW losing brings them out. They can't help it, its like a werewolf in a full moon.
Oh for fucks sake.
There’s still cum stains on the inside of my monitor from when Oregon lost to Stanford in 2012.
Bellotti won the Fiesta Bowel, owns 4 10-win seasons, 2 conference titles and beat the best UW team since the 1991 squad.
I know it's fun to call him "Mediocre Mike" around here, but he'd be either the best or second best coach in the league if he were coaching in the PAC now.
He's mediocre compared to Kelly, but so is everyone else in this league and most of college football save Saban or Urbz.
1 outright conference championship and 1/3 of a conference championship in 14 years on the job (11 of those 14 years in a ten team conference) makes him nothing but mediocre.
1 top 5 finish in 14 years on the job makes him nothing but mediocre.
1 meaningful bowel win in 14 years makes him nothing but mediocre.
A worse conference winning percentage than Jim Lambright makes him nothing but mediocre.
He's mediocre Mike because he was mediocre.
Best coach in the conference if he was coaching today my ass.
Your better than this.
To me "Mediocre" is a C. "Good" is a B, and "Excellent" is an A.
Coaching in the league kind of sucks right now. There's no Carrolls, Harbaughs, un-burned out Tedfords, kings of Poop Island, or good Dennis Ericksons right now.
Bellotti was a B coach with a couple of B+ years. He got good results from the talent he had, usually overperformed his recruiting, and learned from his mistakes.
At major conference programs, Bellotti and Peterman have averaged about 9 wins per season, and Bellotti did it with one fewer game than Peterman, for the most part.
Bellotti had one losing record in 14 seasons at a program that had finished below .500 in 18 of the previous 30 years before he became head coach.
And Peterman's finished top 25 7 times, same as Iron Mike, over roughly the same amount of tim.
So who in the league would be better? Peterman? Shaw? the Pirate?
Peterman and Shaw are probably better than Iron Mike but not be a super-wide margin, and Shaw is Shaw. We're going to see what Peterman is really made of over the next 2-3 years.
Holy quook alert. Pete has a better winning percentage "at major programs" despite winning the same amount of games per year and getting an extra game.
Your narrative sucks harder than your maff.
Oh and they both coached before they were at a major program and Pete > Bellotti there.
If you really think the average of Pete's first four years at UW is the average of what he'll accomplish at UW then sure, he's about Bellotti's level of a mediocre coach.
Sure.gif
UW Pete has as many top 5 finishes as Bellotti did in 11 less years.
UW Pete has as many outright conference titles as Bellotti did in 11 years.
Overall Pete has more BCS wins than Bellotti did in two less years (and that's just counting Bellotti at Oregon).
Only a Quook would look at their resumes and say they're on the same level.
Once again, your better than this.
No, no he's not
Guys like AZ normally have barely perceptible quook levels, but UW losing brings them out. They can't help it, its like a werewolf in a full moon.
Oh for fucks sake.
There’s still cum stains on the inside of my monitor from when Oregon lost to Stanford in 2012.
Bellotti won the Fiesta Bowel, owns 4 10-win seasons, 2 conference titles and beat the best UW team since the 1991 squad.
I know it's fun to call him "Mediocre Mike" around here, but he'd be either the best or second best coach in the league if he were coaching in the PAC now.
He's mediocre compared to Kelly, but so is everyone else in this league and most of college football save Saban or Urbz.
1 outright conference championship and 1/3 of a conference championship in 14 years on the job (11 of those 14 years in a ten team conference) makes him nothing but mediocre.
1 top 5 finish in 14 years on the job makes him nothing but mediocre.
1 meaningful bowel win in 14 years makes him nothing but mediocre.
A worse conference winning percentage than Jim Lambright makes him nothing but mediocre.
He's mediocre Mike because he was mediocre.
Best coach in the conference if he was coaching today my ass.
Your better than this.
To me "Mediocre" is a C. "Good" is a B, and "Excellent" is an A.
Coaching in the league kind of sucks right now. There's no Carrolls, Harbaughs, un-burned out Tedfords, kings of Poop Island, or good Dennis Ericksons right now.
Bellotti was a B coach with a couple of B+ years. He got good results from the talent he had, usually overperformed his recruiting, and learned from his mistakes.
At major conference programs, Bellotti and Peterman have averaged about 9 wins per season, and Bellotti did it with one fewer game than Peterman, for the most part.
Bellotti had one losing record in 14 seasons at a program that had finished below .500 in 18 of the previous 30 years before he became head coach.
And Peterman's finished top 25 7 times, same as Iron Mike, over roughly the same amount of tim.
So who in the league would be better? Peterman? Shaw? the Pirate?
Peterman and Shaw are probably better than Iron Mike but not be a super-wide margin, and Shaw is Shaw. We're going to see what Peterman is really made of over the next 2-3 years.
Holy quook alert. Pete has a better winning percentage "at major programs" despite winning the same amount of games per year and getting an extra game.
Your narrative sucks harder than your maff.
Oh and they both coached before they were at a major program and Pete > Bellotti there.
If you really think the average of Pete's first four years at UW is the average of what he'll accomplish at UW then sure, he's about Bellotti's level of a mediocre coach.
Sure.gif
UW Pete has as many top 5 finishes as Bellotti did in 11 less years.
UW Pete has as many outright conference titles as Bellotti did in 11 years.
Overall Pete has more BCS wins than Bellotti did in two less years (and that's just counting Bellotti at Oregon).
Only a Quook would look at their resumes and say they're on the same level.
Once again, your better than this.
No, no he's not
Guys like AZ normally have barely perceptible quook levels, but UW losing brings them out. They can't help it, its like a werewolf in a full moon.
Oh for fucks sake.
There’s still cum stains on the inside of my monitor from when Oregon lost to Stanford in 2012.
Bellotti won the Fiesta Bowel, owns 4 10-win seasons, 2 conference titles and beat the best UW team since the 1991 squad.
I know it's fun to call him "Mediocre Mike" around here, but he'd be either the best or second best coach in the league if he were coaching in the PAC now.
He's mediocre compared to Kelly, but so is everyone else in this league and most of college football save Saban or Urbz.
1 outright conference championship and 1/3 of a conference championship in 14 years on the job (11 of those 14 years in a ten team conference) makes him nothing but mediocre.
1 top 5 finish in 14 years on the job makes him nothing but mediocre.
1 meaningful bowel win in 14 years makes him nothing but mediocre.
A worse conference winning percentage than Jim Lambright makes him nothing but mediocre.
He's mediocre Mike because he was mediocre.
Best coach in the conference if he was coaching today my ass.
Your better than this.
To me "Mediocre" is a C. "Good" is a B, and "Excellent" is an A.
Coaching in the league kind of sucks right now. There's no Carrolls, Harbaughs, un-burned out Tedfords, kings of Poop Island, or good Dennis Ericksons right now.
Bellotti was a B coach with a couple of B+ years. He got good results from the talent he had, usually overperformed his recruiting, and learned from his mistakes.
At major conference programs, Bellotti and Peterman have averaged about 9 wins per season, and Bellotti did it with one fewer game than Peterman, for the most part.
Bellotti had one losing record in 14 seasons at a program that had finished below .500 in 18 of the previous 30 years before he became head coach.
And Peterman's finished top 25 7 times, same as Iron Mike, over roughly the same amount of tim.
So who in the league would be better? Peterman? Shaw? the Pirate?
Peterman and Shaw are probably better than Iron Mike but not be a super-wide margin, and Shaw is Shaw. We're going to see what Peterman is really made of over the next 2-3 years.
Holy quook alert. Pete has a better winning percentage "at major programs" despite winning the same amount of games per year and getting an extra game.
Your narrative sucks harder than your maff.
Oh and they both coached before they were at a major program and Pete > Bellotti there.
If you really think the average of Pete's first four years at UW is the average of what he'll accomplish at UW then sure, he's about Bellotti's level of a mediocre coach.
Sure.gif
UW Pete has as many top 5 finishes as Bellotti did in 11 less years.
UW Pete has as many outright conference titles as Bellotti did in 11 years.
Overall Pete has more BCS wins than Bellotti did in two less years (and that's just counting Bellotti at Oregon).
Only a Quook would look at their resumes and say they're on the same level.
Once again, your better than this.
Is Peterman the best coach in this league?
If you believe he is or if he’s in the top 2, AZ isn’t far off in his analysis.
You would have to agree with that. There’s literally no argument.
#whitebellotti
I believe Pete is the best coach in the league but if his next four years match his first four years (slightly better than Bellotti) I'll be very disappointed.
I'd take David Shaw over Bellotti in a heartbeat.
I don't believe Bellotti could do what Leach has done at WSU.
There's plenty of argument.
The only other PAC 12 coach who could do what Leach has done at WSU is Peterman.
Bellotti won the Fiesta Bowel, owns 4 10-win seasons, 2 conference titles and beat the best UW team since the 1991 squad.
I know it's fun to call him "Mediocre Mike" around here, but he'd be either the best or second best coach in the league if he were coaching in the PAC now.
He's mediocre compared to Kelly, but so is everyone else in this league and most of college football save Saban or Urbz.
1 outright conference championship and 1/3 of a conference championship in 14 years on the job (11 of those 14 years in a ten team conference) makes him nothing but mediocre.
1 top 5 finish in 14 years on the job makes him nothing but mediocre.
1 meaningful bowel win in 14 years makes him nothing but mediocre.
A worse conference winning percentage than Jim Lambright makes him nothing but mediocre.
He's mediocre Mike because he was mediocre.
Best coach in the conference if he was coaching today my ass.
Your better than this.
To me "Mediocre" is a C. "Good" is a B, and "Excellent" is an A.
Coaching in the league kind of sucks right now. There's no Carrolls, Harbaughs, un-burned out Tedfords, kings of Poop Island, or good Dennis Ericksons right now.
Bellotti was a B coach with a couple of B+ years. He got good results from the talent he had, usually overperformed his recruiting, and learned from his mistakes.
At major conference programs, Bellotti and Peterman have averaged about 9 wins per season, and Bellotti did it with one fewer game than Peterman, for the most part.
Bellotti had one losing record in 14 seasons at a program that had finished below .500 in 18 of the previous 30 years before he became head coach.
And Peterman's finished top 25 7 times, same as Iron Mike, over roughly the same amount of tim.
So who in the league would be better? Peterman? Shaw? the Pirate?
Peterman and Shaw are probably better than Iron Mike but not be a super-wide margin, and Shaw is Shaw. We're going to see what Peterman is really made of over the next 2-3 years.
Holy quook alert. Pete has a better winning percentage "at major programs" despite winning the same amount of games per year and getting an extra game.
Your narrative sucks harder than your maff.
Oh and they both coached before they were at a major program and Pete > Bellotti there.
If you really think the average of Pete's first four years at UW is the average of what he'll accomplish at UW then sure, he's about Bellotti's level of a mediocre coach.
Sure.gif
UW Pete has as many top 5 finishes as Bellotti did in 11 less years.
UW Pete has as many outright conference titles as Bellotti did in 11 years.
Overall Pete has more BCS wins than Bellotti did in two less years (and that's just counting Bellotti at Oregon).
Only a Quook would look at their resumes and say they're on the same level.
Once again, your better than this.
Is Peterman the best coach in this league?
If you believe he is or if he’s in the top 2, AZ isn’t far off in his analysis.
You would have to agree with that. There’s literally no argument.
#whitebellotti
I believe Pete is the best coach in the league but if his next four years match his first four years (slightly better than Bellotti) I'll be very disappointed.
I'd take David Shaw over Bellotti in a heartbeat.
I don't believe Bellotti could do what Leach has done at WSU.
There's plenty of argument.
The only other PAC 12 coach who could do what Leach has done at WSU is Peterman.
This is one of the longest, most intimate, passionate circle jerks I've ever seen. Congrats. You're all rubbed out and spent over forgotten coaches like Snyder, Bellotti and Ericksen.
It's one thing to yankoff to hot pics of busty chicks, but quite another to yankoff to old white men. Gross.
Bellotti won the Fiesta Bowel, owns 4 10-win seasons, 2 conference titles and beat the best UW team since the 1991 squad.
I know it's fun to call him "Mediocre Mike" around here, but he'd be either the best or second best coach in the league if he were coaching in the PAC now.
He's mediocre compared to Kelly, but so is everyone else in this league and most of college football save Saban or Urbz.
1 outright conference championship and 1/3 of a conference championship in 14 years on the job (11 of those 14 years in a ten team conference) makes him nothing but mediocre.
1 top 5 finish in 14 years on the job makes him nothing but mediocre.
1 meaningful bowel win in 14 years makes him nothing but mediocre.
A worse conference winning percentage than Jim Lambright makes him nothing but mediocre.
He's mediocre Mike because he was mediocre.
Best coach in the conference if he was coaching today my ass.
Your better than this.
To me "Mediocre" is a C. "Good" is a B, and "Excellent" is an A.
Coaching in the league kind of sucks right now. There's no Carrolls, Harbaughs, un-burned out Tedfords, kings of Poop Island, or good Dennis Ericksons right now.
Bellotti was a B coach with a couple of B+ years. He got good results from the talent he had, usually overperformed his recruiting, and learned from his mistakes.
At major conference programs, Bellotti and Peterman have averaged about 9 wins per season, and Bellotti did it with one fewer game than Peterman, for the most part.
Bellotti had one losing record in 14 seasons at a program that had finished below .500 in 18 of the previous 30 years before he became head coach.
And Peterman's finished top 25 7 times, same as Iron Mike, over roughly the same amount of tim.
So who in the league would be better? Peterman? Shaw? the Pirate?
Peterman and Shaw are probably better than Iron Mike but not be a super-wide margin, and Shaw is Shaw. We're going to see what Peterman is really made of over the next 2-3 years.
Holy quook alert. Pete has a better winning percentage "at major programs" despite winning the same amount of games per year and getting an extra game.
Your narrative sucks harder than your maff.
Oh and they both coached before they were at a major program and Pete > Bellotti there.
If you really think the average of Pete's first four years at UW is the average of what he'll accomplish at UW then sure, he's about Bellotti's level of a mediocre coach.
Sure.gif
UW Pete has as many top 5 finishes as Bellotti did in 11 less years.
UW Pete has as many outright conference titles as Bellotti did in 11 years.
Overall Pete has more BCS wins than Bellotti did in two less years (and that's just counting Bellotti at Oregon).
Only a Quook would look at their resumes and say they're on the same level.
Once again, your better than this.
Is Peterman the best coach in this league?
If you believe he is or if he’s in the top 2, AZ isn’t far off in his analysis.
You would have to agree with that. There’s literally no argument.
#whitebellotti
I believe Pete is the best coach in the league but if his next four years match his first four years (slightly better than Bellotti) I'll be very disappointed.
I'd take David Shaw over Bellotti in a heartbeat.
I don't believe Bellotti could do what Leach has done at WSU.
There's plenty of argument.
The only other PAC 12 coach who could do what Leach has done at WSU is Peterman.
Then why can’t he do it at Washington?
Because it's hard to win a bunch of games while accomplishing nothing every year.
Comments
On another note the same year Real Bellotti won his only outright title Real Pete Carroll entered the PAC. We all know what came next.
Will be interesting to see how White Bellotti contends with Gay Pete Carroll should that deal get done.
Fucking Carroll.
AZ did make one point saying he would be concerned if he were a Husky fan after this year.
I'm always concerned for one thing but in my frame of reference he is right on schedule. A dip is OK and we'll wait for the final record to see how much, because he came in and won by year three which is always our first barometer, with Joe Fuckface's players.
In other words he wasn't crying for more time
Now he's dealing with the holes in his recruiting and building the next wave. With divisions its a little tricky but James' big claim to fame was 18 years of finishing first or second most years. Almost all of them.
Compared to Saban at Bama who got it rolling and it hasn't stopped, then yeah, some concern. Compared to what Washington can do when SERIOUS about football right on track
We have the recruiting nerds and internet warriors we need to keep him honest
There’s still cum stains on the inside of my monitor from when Oregon lost to Stanford in 2012.
Fucking pussies.
It's one thing to yankoff to hot pics of busty chicks, but quite another to yankoff to old white men. Gross.
This place hasn't been the same since Derek opened the gates and cracked down on sandwich porn and hot dogs.