Some quotes from a conversation I've had with a doog tonight

dhdawg

"No coach is perfect, but if you fire a good coach for not being perfect then you deserve what you get. Unfortunately, the rest of us would have to suffer with you."
"Also, special teams and penalties have not been a long term problem. Feels like an outlier this season, most likely. "
"The halftime stat screams for context. How does that number stack up against other coaches? How many of those games was UW favored to lose by multiple scores before kickoff? etc."
"Also, it looks really bad to call for a coach to be fired when he is leading the team to their best season in well over a decade. It just makes those people look incredibly unthankful and shortsighted."

dhdawg

"You know, Pete Carroll sometimes punts from the opponent 30 yard line in a close game, despite having basically the most accurate kicker in the NFL. I really hate that. We should fire the bum."

dhdawg

In response to me saying carroll is 10-1 making that comparison laughable:

I'm glad you brought this up, because it perfectly illustrates why I think the Fire Sark talk is silly, and also why I can't stand Danny O'Neil. Winning is not a stat. Or if it is, it is the stat that idiots love.

The reason football is a great game is because it is so complex. Every week in the NFL you see the better team lose football games here and there. The Seahawks have been the beneficiary of a few of those games this year, and they were the victim of it last year. Is 10-1 Pete Carroll a better coach than last year's 11-5 version? Was last year's 13-3 Mike Smith a better coach than Pete? The same coach who is currently 2-9?

Judging a team just by wins gets you KC at the top of the power rankings for most of the season, even as everyone in the world knew it was a laughable farce.

Did you know that this year's Seahawks team is weaker in DVOA than last year's team was, with a lower pythagorean win total? Now is that difference because Pete Carroll really stepped up his game and made some magical rah rahs from the sideline or do we just chalk it up to last year's team being unluckier than this year's version? Me, I'm going with luck (variance). Variance in football is routine.

Football Outsiders gave the 2012 Seahawks 13 estimated wins, meaning that with average luck they would have been two wins better... that whatever their record said, they played like a 13-3 team.

I feel like the Huskies are in that same boat. They are 7-4 but statistically they have played on a level more like a 9-2 team. This was not true in some of the previous years where UW needed clutch wins to scrape 6-6 records. This year when our team isn't losing heart breakers or having weird off games, when they aren't doing that, they are consistently melting teams faces off.

I think it's weird for anybody to call for a coaches job when he's multiple games over .500. We aren't Texas or Alabama. We are a few years removed from being a decade long doormat. But if we were playing terrible football and lucking into wins, I'd understand. But that's not what's going on. This team is playing at level like we've never seen before in some respects, but is just not having the kind of bounces you'd like to have in such a strong season.

Not that you'd hear anything resembling that level of nuance from Sark's haters, which are basically just reacting emotionally and forgetting that the grass isn't always greener.

The fewest points UW has scored in a game all season is 24. UW is averaging 39.54 points per game so far this season. When was the last time you could say that? Their scoring differential for the season is a gaudy +171 in 11 games. Their yardage differential is similarly impressive. How is a team like that 7-4? Small sample size and variance. Luck. Chance.

If in some weird alternate universe college football played a 162 game schedule, you can bet that UW would be rocketing up towards the top of the standings by year's end with numbers like that. If people want to react to outcomes from small sample sizes they can, but I won't stand idly by while they act outside their own best interests in calling for Sark's head.

we are so fucked

[Deleted User]

dhdawg said:

"You know, Pete Carroll sometimes punts from the opponent 30 yard line in a close game, despite having basically the most accurate kicker in the NFL. I really hate that. We should fire the bum."

I love when Doogs bring up weird obscure hypotheticals to distract the argument. I'm sure Carroll has punted from the 30's but it's probably like on the 38 and it's 4th and 10 with the Seahawks defense playing great so he wants to pin them deep. It's what James and every other smart coach would do.

Not to mention that accurate kicker isn't known for having a leg. He's so accurate because Carroll knows his limitations and doesn't bother wasting him on long FG attempts that could be missed. Ryan also leads the NFL in punts inside the 20 and net punt average.

So that point is totally stupid as was every other point.

Feel free to quote this word for word to your buddy.

dhdawg

btw using his logic you cannot say tui was a winner (which most describe him as being) he's saying he was a lucky QB instead cause all the wins were close