We are not that bad on the road

The_Undertaker

UW Doog pound excuse machine is getting out of control. Unbelievable.
http://www.uwdawgpound.com/2013/11/13/5092934/road-dawgs-evaluating-the-huskies-on-the-road-under-sark

TL;DR => the author, using a pseudo statistical analysis, is arguing that we aren't that bad on the road because we actually haven't really lost to teams worse than us.
The stupid part is that he uses end of the season computer rankings to determine whether the team we lost to was better than us or not. Hey genius, maybe the rankings wouldn't have that team as better than us if we actually didn't let them plunger us...
Oh and I hate all arguments of type "it's ok to lose to team X because they were favored anyway". Then I guess it's ok to be 1-11, 0-12, as long as the other teams were favored every time.... Morons...
Read the comment section, most people agree with the author except for a couple guys who try to explain them their argument is not valid. Everyone says we are vastly improved etc...

TL;DR , TL;DR => 4-5, 5-4, 5-4, 5-4, 3-3 is the only stat that matters

dnc

dgd

[Deleted User]

He repeats the difference in rankings as an excuse over and over.

WHAT THE FUCK WHY ISN'T OUR RANKING BETTER THEN!? WHY IS SARK NOT MAKING US A BETTER TEAM YOU FUCKING DOLT!?

[Deleted User]

This comment...Ho. Lee. Fuk.

context matters Lear

If you’re in a class with a bunch of brilliant folks, you might answer 93 out of 100 questions correctly – i.e. do very well – but find yourself with only the 13th best score out of a class of 20. Does that mean you sucked on the test?

The Pac-12 is very strong in the upper half of the conference this year, and that should be taken into consideration.

Go Dawgs!
uwdawgpound.com
by Kirk DeGrasse on Nov 13, 2013 | 2:20 PM up reply

[Deleted User]

The Pac-12 is a fucking #dreckfest this year. Time to run a DDOS attack on that website.

TheKobeStopper

It's amazing that they can't connect the dots between UW losing to teams better than them, UW losing lots of games and Sark being responsible for how good UW is. Yes, UWoses road games to teams that are better than them. THATS THE WHOLE FUCKING PROBLEM. THOSE TEAMS ARE BETTER. (I like to use caps to make my POINT)

You don't want a coach that can beat better teams. Pat Hill could beat better teams. You want to be the better team.

Sark had his chance to build it. He failed. Case closed.

Tailgater

Football is and has to be much simpler and immune from such intellectual loser repartee:
Fuck losing and Fuck rankings, ratings, and betting-prognosticator spreads.

CFetters_Nacho_Lover

Everything you need to know about why this writer is both an idiot and a loser is summed up with this line:

On the whole, it doesn't appear that Washington played poorly on the road in 2009

Um, UW lost every road game that year. That is poor. HTH.

dnc

You are what your record says you are.

Haid_D_Salaami

This article clearly proves there is a whole different classification of doogism out there.

The avg doog (most anyway, imo) actually understands UW football is mediocre. But sees "incremental progress" where logical people do not...and believes Sark will get it done if we only give him the next fucking decade to get his guys in. They accept mediocrity because "it's better than 0-12".

Then there are the denial doogs. Those who are so fucktarded that they actually believe Sark is really getting it done.

Good example would be Jay Torrell from the dogman picks yesterday
"Please name any team outside of the top 15 that would have won one of those 3 games"

Umm....Utah? Notre Dame?

These poor delusional fuckers will keep drinking the koolaid and follow Seven as he leads UW football right down the drain.

There literally is no help for them.....

chuck

Fetters logic. Maybe he's mentoring that guy. His mantra, since the UCLA and OSU games became a hot topic a few weeks ago, has been that nobody should expect to win those games (those teams are better than us after all) therefore the program/coach shouldn't be judged based on them.

TheKobeStopper

Haid_D_Salaami said:

This article clearly proves there is a whole different classification of doogism out there.

The avg doog (most anyway, imo) actually understands UW football is mediocre. But sees "incremental progress" where logical people do not...and believes Sark will get it done if we only give him the next fucking decade to get his guys in. They accept mediocrity because "it's better than 0-12".

Then there are the denial doogs. Those who are so fucktarded that they actually believe Sark is really getting it done.

Good example would be Jay Torrell from the dogman picks yesterday
"Please name any team outside of the top 15 that would have won one of those 3 games"

Umm....Utah? Notre Dame?

These poor delusional fuckers will keep drinking the koolaid and follow Seven as he leads UW football right down the drain.

There literally is no help for them.....

Yeah, UW isn't in the top 15. That's like the problem brah.

TheKobeStopper

Haid_D_Salaami said:

This article clearly proves there is a whole different classification of doogism out there.

The avg doog (most anyway, imo) actually understands UW football is mediocre. But sees "incremental progress" where logical people do not...and believes Sark will get it done if we only give him the next fucking decade to get his guys in. They accept mediocrity because "it's better than 0-12".

Then there are the denial doogs. Those who are so fucktarded that they actually believe Sark is really getting it done.

Good example would be Jay Torrell from the dogman picks yesterday
"Please name any team outside of the top 15 that would have won one of those 3 games"

Umm....Utah? Notre Dame?

These poor delusional fuckers will keep drinking the koolaid and follow Seven as he leads UW football right down the drain.

There literally is no help for them.....

Yeah, UW isn't in the top 15. That's like the problem brah.

TierbsHsotBoobs

chuck said:

Fetters logic. Maybe he's mentoring that guy. His mantra, since the UCLA and OSU games became a hot topic a few weeks ago, has been that nobody should expect to win those games (those teams are better than us after all) therefore the program/coach shouldn't be judged based on them.

Following this line of logic, there's only one way to save Husky football.

Drop the program down to the Big Sky where UW *might* be better than the other teams in the conference.

dnc

Haid_D_Salaami said:

This article clearly proves there is a whole different classification of doogism out there.

The avg doog (most anyway, imo) actually understands UW football is mediocre. But sees "incremental progress" where logical people do not...and believes Sark will get it done if we only give him the next fucking decade to get his guys in. They accept mediocrity because "it's better than 0-12".

Then there are the denial doogs. Those who are so fucktarded that they actually believe Sark is really getting it done.

Good example would be Jay Torrell from the dogman picks yesterday
"Please name any team outside of the top 15 that would have won one of those 3 games"

Umm....Utah? Notre Dame?

These poor delusional fuckers will keep drinking the koolaid and follow Seven as he leads UW football right down the drain.

There literally is no help for them.....

Yikes. Your poast made me go read the predictions over there. Plenty of doogism as expected, but what really surprised me was the evident frustration in Fetters and Samek's poasts. They're too scared to come out and say it of course, but you can tell both of them know Sark's not the right guy.

dnc

Yeah, UW isn't in the top 15. That's like the problem brah.

dnc

Yeah, UW isn't in the top 15. That's like the problem brah.

TierbsHsotBoobs

Yeah, UW isn't in the top 15. That's like the problem brah.

TierbsHsotBoobs

Yeah, UW isn't in the top 15. That's like the problem brah.

TheKobeStopper

I'll just roll my eyes.

RaceBannon

Yeah, UW isn't in the top 15. That's like the problem brah