Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
Pete's record at UW in one score or less games
Comments
-
Still the GOAT. I'm glad Race will outlive me because I would be really sad if he died.RaceBannon said:
To add to your point Saban has gone undefeated once. One time. Uno. And only one time was the one loss in the title game. Its hard. Losing to Auburn was not unexpected even though they cratered. Any Husky coach who loses to Oregon will get a load of shit. Its Cal that has everyone verklemt. Win the League and this old Husky will forgive all. Stack up league titles like cord wood, recruit like a motherfucker and win the national games. The formula.UWhuskytskeet said:Worth noting Pete rarely loses games by more than one score. Unless he's going undefeated every year, they are only going to come from one-score games.
2014: 6-3
2015: 6-3
2016: 10-2
2017: 9-0
2018: 4-0
23-2 since we've had a pulse.
Here is Saban's record in one-score games since 2014. Obviously better than Pete's, but still far lower than Saban's overall winning percentage. Point being, good teams only lose by one score.
2014: 3-2
2015: 1-1
2016: 1-1
2017: 3-0
2018: 0-0
8-4
-
@Passion and @AIRWOLF, true??11?!!Swaye said:
Still the GOAT. I'm glad Race will outlive me because I would be really sad if he died.RaceBannon said:
To add to your point Saban has gone undefeated once. One time. Uno. And only one time was the one loss in the title game. Its hard. Losing to Auburn was not unexpected even though they cratered. Any Husky coach who loses to Oregon will get a load of shit. Its Cal that has everyone verklemt. Win the League and this old Husky will forgive all. Stack up league titles like cord wood, recruit like a motherfucker and win the national games. The formula.UWhuskytskeet said:Worth noting Pete rarely loses games by more than one score. Unless he's going undefeated every year, they are only going to come from one-score games.
2014: 6-3
2015: 6-3
2016: 10-2
2017: 9-0
2018: 4-0
23-2 since we've had a pulse.
Here is Saban's record in one-score games since 2014. Obviously better than Pete's, but still far lower than Saban's overall winning percentage. Point being, good teams only lose by one score.
2014: 3-2
2015: 1-1
2016: 1-1
2017: 3-0
2018: 0-0
8-4 -
Hate makes me stronger
-
Stop blaming Pete for Browning being a pant shitter.
UW is going to steamroll people the next 2 years. -
We still lostBaphomet said:Another way to spin this is that we have lost our 3 games by a total of 8 points.
-
2022 will be speshul POTD!SarkFanSixtyNine said:Stop blaming Pete for Browning being a pant shitter.
UW is going to steamroll people the next 2 years. -
This is also known as The Romar Defense.creepycoug said:
Petersen leaving UW would be a dark day for that program. Who else is coming?Homebrew_Dawg said:
His QB. His system. His recruiting. He's the CEO of the program. He's been repeatedly out coached in the bowl games and the loses this season. He has made his own bed, and we have to sleep in it until he changes or leaves.creepycoug said:
I always do. Thanks. Didn't say his play calling hasn't cost the DAWGS! a few close games. But his QB shitting himself is part of the number.Homebrew_Dawg said:
Big games, close games, no matter Pete loses more than he wins. He's been a loser at UW when it counts the most. Not a signature win in almost 5 years (except maybe Stanfurd 2016). Seems like a choker to me. But think what you will creepy. We can't help you.creepycoug said:
Record is very different with a different QB.YellowSnow said:Helps @creepycoug IMO
It's a little more on him than 'he's playing the hand he was dealt', but a lot of those losses are on browshoes. Pete doesn't take the snaps.
I don't think Pete's a choker.
He's also had really three chances for a 'signature win' by my count. The first one was forgivable; everybody loses to Alabama. The Auburn loss is a stinger, I agree.
Penn State is a hard one to score. PSU looked like the better team, but Pete made adjustments to keep it close.
First adult in the position in eons.
What happens if he runs the table and wins the Rose Bowl? All is forgiven?
I just don't see choker tag on Peterman.
As opposed to the Romar D-fence. -
Ok!!!!!!!!!!!!BleachedAnusDawg said:
This is also known as The Romar Defense.creepycoug said:
Petersen leaving UW would be a dark day for that program. Who else is coming?Homebrew_Dawg said:
His QB. His system. His recruiting. He's the CEO of the program. He's been repeatedly out coached in the bowl games and the loses this season. He has made his own bed, and we have to sleep in it until he changes or leaves.creepycoug said:
I always do. Thanks. Didn't say his play calling hasn't cost the DAWGS! a few close games. But his QB shitting himself is part of the number.Homebrew_Dawg said:
Big games, close games, no matter Pete loses more than he wins. He's been a loser at UW when it counts the most. Not a signature win in almost 5 years (except maybe Stanfurd 2016). Seems like a choker to me. But think what you will creepy. We can't help you.creepycoug said:
Record is very different with a different QB.YellowSnow said:Helps @creepycoug IMO
It's a little more on him than 'he's playing the hand he was dealt', but a lot of those losses are on browshoes. Pete doesn't take the snaps.
I don't think Pete's a choker.
He's also had really three chances for a 'signature win' by my count. The first one was forgivable; everybody loses to Alabama. The Auburn loss is a stinger, I agree.
Penn State is a hard one to score. PSU looked like the better team, but Pete made adjustments to keep it close.
First adult in the position in eons.
What happens if he runs the table and wins the Rose Bowl? All is forgiven?
I just don't see choker tag on Peterman.
As opposed to the Romar D-fence. -
Good point. Another point to make is that these are very small sample sizes and we shouldn't be that amazed when a coin comes up heads 9 out of 10 flips.UWhuskytskeet said:Worth noting Pete rarely loses games by more than one score. Unless he's going undefeated every year, they are only going to come from one-score games.
2014: 6-3
2015: 6-3
2016: 10-2
2017: 9-0
2018: 4-0
23-2 since we've had a pulse.
Here is Saban's record in one-score games since 2014. Obviously better than Pete's, but still far lower than Saban's overall winning percentage. Point being, good teams only lose by one score.
2014: 3-2
2015: 1-1
2016: 1-1
2017: 3-0
2018: 0-0
8-4
Just a couple examples-
Mark D'Antonio- started career 6-12 in one score games then went 6-1 in 2015 to get to the CFP with a pretty overrated team. Those wins included Michigan botching a punt snap with 10 seconds left and Vernon Adams missing a wide open Byron Marshall in the final minute.
Gus Malzahn- started his head coaching career 12-1 in one score games.
His last 13? 3-10. -
This is pretty stupid since he made the playoffs in year 3.Homebrew_Dawg said:
Except for emotional comments during particularly frustrating moments in games (and shortly after), I don’t advocate firing Petersen. However, my optimism towards him has waned, mostly due to his game time conduct and decisions. This, coupled with passionless and emotionally indifferent expression from the players, gives me pause about whether he will take the program beyond middling 9-4 and 10-3 type years. Not that I want it, nor am I so predicting, but I won’t be surprised if this 2018 team flatlines and loses the last three games. More than the offense being broken, and more than can be excused due to injuries, the team feels to me like it’s at a crossroads.creepycoug said:
I can respect that, but I warn you that you will be in a small and lonely group in that case.Homebrew_Dawg said:
The fallacy of this logic is it is exactly the same that was used to keep nonperforming coaches in their jobs, to the point no one wanted the job when Sarkisian came. Whether Pete runs the table and wins the Rose Bowl, which I believe is highly unlikely, my opinion of him would not change. In fact, I would be more frustrated at his squandering this season's opportunities.creepycoug said:
Petersen leaving UW would be a dark day for that program. Who else is coming?Homebrew_Dawg said:
His QB. His system. His recruiting. He's the CEO of the program. He's been repeatedly out coached in the bowl games and the loses this season. He has made his own bed, and we have to sleep in it until he changes or leaves.creepycoug said:
I always do. Thanks. Didn't say his play calling hasn't cost the DAWGS! a few close games. But his QB shitting himself is part of the number.Homebrew_Dawg said:
Big games, close games, no matter Pete loses more than he wins. He's been a loser at UW when it counts the most. Not a signature win in almost 5 years (except maybe Stanfurd 2016). Seems like a choker to me. But think what you will creepy. We can't help you.creepycoug said:
Record is very different with a different QB.YellowSnow said:Helps @creepycoug IMO
It's a little more on him than 'he's playing the hand he was dealt', but a lot of those losses are on browshoes. Pete doesn't take the snaps.
I don't think Pete's a choker.
He's also had really three chances for a 'signature win' by my count. The first one was forgivable; everybody loses to Alabama. The Auburn loss is a stinger, I agree.
Penn State is a hard one to score. PSU looked like the better team, but Pete made adjustments to keep it close.
First adult in the position in eons.
What happens if he runs the table and wins the Rose Bowl? All is forgiven?
I just don't see choker tag on Peterman.
I agree he is the first adult in a long while. My main assertion is he needs to change his approach if he is going to make this program elite. He has had a taste (CPF in 2016) of what is required at that level, but so far I'm not seeing sufficient evidence he will make the transition anytime soon. The Cal loss was a microcosm of what's still wrong with this program.
It's year 5, but then again, it's year 5. He inherited a bit of a train wreck, and had you? in the playoffs in fairly short order. There is no doubt Washington is in the best shape it's been in since James retired.
I'd deliberate for a very long time before coming to the conclusion that firing Petersen made any sense. But that's me. -
Seriously. UW's rivals would collectively cheer quite enthusiastically if UW were to fire Peterman. They know what I know: Washington got lucky and the right guy with the right interest and right life circumstances was available at the right time.FremontTroll said:
This is pretty stupid since he made the playoffs in year 3.Homebrew_Dawg said:
Except for emotional comments during particularly frustrating moments in games (and shortly after), I don’t advocate firing Petersen. However, my optimism towards him has waned, mostly due to his game time conduct and decisions. This, coupled with passionless and emotionally indifferent expression from the players, gives me pause about whether he will take the program beyond middling 9-4 and 10-3 type years. Not that I want it, nor am I so predicting, but I won’t be surprised if this 2018 team flatlines and loses the last three games. More than the offense being broken, and more than can be excused due to injuries, the team feels to me like it’s at a crossroads.creepycoug said:
I can respect that, but I warn you that you will be in a small and lonely group in that case.Homebrew_Dawg said:
The fallacy of this logic is it is exactly the same that was used to keep nonperforming coaches in their jobs, to the point no one wanted the job when Sarkisian came. Whether Pete runs the table and wins the Rose Bowl, which I believe is highly unlikely, my opinion of him would not change. In fact, I would be more frustrated at his squandering this season's opportunities.creepycoug said:
Petersen leaving UW would be a dark day for that program. Who else is coming?Homebrew_Dawg said:
His QB. His system. His recruiting. He's the CEO of the program. He's been repeatedly out coached in the bowl games and the loses this season. He has made his own bed, and we have to sleep in it until he changes or leaves.creepycoug said:
I always do. Thanks. Didn't say his play calling hasn't cost the DAWGS! a few close games. But his QB shitting himself is part of the number.Homebrew_Dawg said:
Big games, close games, no matter Pete loses more than he wins. He's been a loser at UW when it counts the most. Not a signature win in almost 5 years (except maybe Stanfurd 2016). Seems like a choker to me. But think what you will creepy. We can't help you.creepycoug said:
Record is very different with a different QB.YellowSnow said:Helps @creepycoug IMO
It's a little more on him than 'he's playing the hand he was dealt', but a lot of those losses are on browshoes. Pete doesn't take the snaps.
I don't think Pete's a choker.
He's also had really three chances for a 'signature win' by my count. The first one was forgivable; everybody loses to Alabama. The Auburn loss is a stinger, I agree.
Penn State is a hard one to score. PSU looked like the better team, but Pete made adjustments to keep it close.
First adult in the position in eons.
What happens if he runs the table and wins the Rose Bowl? All is forgiven?
I just don't see choker tag on Peterman.
I agree he is the first adult in a long while. My main assertion is he needs to change his approach if he is going to make this program elite. He has had a taste (CPF in 2016) of what is required at that level, but so far I'm not seeing sufficient evidence he will make the transition anytime soon. The Cal loss was a microcosm of what's still wrong with this program.
It's year 5, but then again, it's year 5. He inherited a bit of a train wreck, and had you? in the playoffs in fairly short order. There is no doubt Washington is in the best shape it's been in since James retired.
I'd deliberate for a very long time before coming to the conclusion that firing Petersen made any sense. But that's me.
It's hard to get it right at schools that can attract most anybody. Washington isn't one of those schools. They hate to hear it, but it's true.
Fire Peterman, and the odds of fucking it up on the next hire are north of 95%.
Washington has a shot at a title with Peterman as soon as something happens in Tuscaloosa to blow up that program.
Until then, it's Nick's world. -
True they defended Sark the way we defend Clay Heltoncreepycoug said:
Seriously. UW's rivals would collectively cheer quite enthusiastically if UW were to fire Peterman. They know what I know: Washington got lucky and the right guy with the right interest and right life circumstances was available at the right time.FremontTroll said:
This is pretty stupid since he made the playoffs in year 3.Homebrew_Dawg said:
Except for emotional comments during particularly frustrating moments in games (and shortly after), I don’t advocate firing Petersen. However, my optimism towards him has waned, mostly due to his game time conduct and decisions. This, coupled with passionless and emotionally indifferent expression from the players, gives me pause about whether he will take the program beyond middling 9-4 and 10-3 type years. Not that I want it, nor am I so predicting, but I won’t be surprised if this 2018 team flatlines and loses the last three games. More than the offense being broken, and more than can be excused due to injuries, the team feels to me like it’s at a crossroads.creepycoug said:
I can respect that, but I warn you that you will be in a small and lonely group in that case.Homebrew_Dawg said:
The fallacy of this logic is it is exactly the same that was used to keep nonperforming coaches in their jobs, to the point no one wanted the job when Sarkisian came. Whether Pete runs the table and wins the Rose Bowl, which I believe is highly unlikely, my opinion of him would not change. In fact, I would be more frustrated at his squandering this season's opportunities.creepycoug said:
Petersen leaving UW would be a dark day for that program. Who else is coming?Homebrew_Dawg said:
His QB. His system. His recruiting. He's the CEO of the program. He's been repeatedly out coached in the bowl games and the loses this season. He has made his own bed, and we have to sleep in it until he changes or leaves.creepycoug said:
I always do. Thanks. Didn't say his play calling hasn't cost the DAWGS! a few close games. But his QB shitting himself is part of the number.Homebrew_Dawg said:
Big games, close games, no matter Pete loses more than he wins. He's been a loser at UW when it counts the most. Not a signature win in almost 5 years (except maybe Stanfurd 2016). Seems like a choker to me. But think what you will creepy. We can't help you.creepycoug said:
Record is very different with a different QB.YellowSnow said:Helps @creepycoug IMO
It's a little more on him than 'he's playing the hand he was dealt', but a lot of those losses are on browshoes. Pete doesn't take the snaps.
I don't think Pete's a choker.
He's also had really three chances for a 'signature win' by my count. The first one was forgivable; everybody loses to Alabama. The Auburn loss is a stinger, I agree.
Penn State is a hard one to score. PSU looked like the better team, but Pete made adjustments to keep it close.
First adult in the position in eons.
What happens if he runs the table and wins the Rose Bowl? All is forgiven?
I just don't see choker tag on Peterman.
I agree he is the first adult in a long while. My main assertion is he needs to change his approach if he is going to make this program elite. He has had a taste (CPF in 2016) of what is required at that level, but so far I'm not seeing sufficient evidence he will make the transition anytime soon. The Cal loss was a microcosm of what's still wrong with this program.
It's year 5, but then again, it's year 5. He inherited a bit of a train wreck, and had you? in the playoffs in fairly short order. There is no doubt Washington is in the best shape it's been in since James retired.
I'd deliberate for a very long time before coming to the conclusion that firing Petersen made any sense. But that's me.
It's hard to get it right at schools that can attract most anybody. Washington isn't one of those schools. They hate to hear it, but it's true.
Fire Peterman, and the odds of fucking it up on the next hire are north of 95%.
Washington has a shot at a title with Peterman as soon as something happens in Tuscaloosa to blow up that program.
Until then, it's Nick's world.
Mosster and the rest are too anxious to feed our anger at Pete -
Fire Pete! Fire Pete!RaceBannon said:
True they defended Sark the way we defend Clay Heltoncreepycoug said:
Seriously. UW's rivals would collectively cheer quite enthusiastically if UW were to fire Peterman. They know what I know: Washington got lucky and the right guy with the right interest and right life circumstances was available at the right time.FremontTroll said:
This is pretty stupid since he made the playoffs in year 3.Homebrew_Dawg said:
Except for emotional comments during particularly frustrating moments in games (and shortly after), I don’t advocate firing Petersen. However, my optimism towards him has waned, mostly due to his game time conduct and decisions. This, coupled with passionless and emotionally indifferent expression from the players, gives me pause about whether he will take the program beyond middling 9-4 and 10-3 type years. Not that I want it, nor am I so predicting, but I won’t be surprised if this 2018 team flatlines and loses the last three games. More than the offense being broken, and more than can be excused due to injuries, the team feels to me like it’s at a crossroads.creepycoug said:
I can respect that, but I warn you that you will be in a small and lonely group in that case.Homebrew_Dawg said:
The fallacy of this logic is it is exactly the same that was used to keep nonperforming coaches in their jobs, to the point no one wanted the job when Sarkisian came. Whether Pete runs the table and wins the Rose Bowl, which I believe is highly unlikely, my opinion of him would not change. In fact, I would be more frustrated at his squandering this season's opportunities.creepycoug said:
Petersen leaving UW would be a dark day for that program. Who else is coming?Homebrew_Dawg said:
His QB. His system. His recruiting. He's the CEO of the program. He's been repeatedly out coached in the bowl games and the loses this season. He has made his own bed, and we have to sleep in it until he changes or leaves.creepycoug said:
I always do. Thanks. Didn't say his play calling hasn't cost the DAWGS! a few close games. But his QB shitting himself is part of the number.Homebrew_Dawg said:
Big games, close games, no matter Pete loses more than he wins. He's been a loser at UW when it counts the most. Not a signature win in almost 5 years (except maybe Stanfurd 2016). Seems like a choker to me. But think what you will creepy. We can't help you.creepycoug said:
Record is very different with a different QB.YellowSnow said:Helps @creepycoug IMO
It's a little more on him than 'he's playing the hand he was dealt', but a lot of those losses are on browshoes. Pete doesn't take the snaps.
I don't think Pete's a choker.
He's also had really three chances for a 'signature win' by my count. The first one was forgivable; everybody loses to Alabama. The Auburn loss is a stinger, I agree.
Penn State is a hard one to score. PSU looked like the better team, but Pete made adjustments to keep it close.
First adult in the position in eons.
What happens if he runs the table and wins the Rose Bowl? All is forgiven?
I just don't see choker tag on Peterman.
I agree he is the first adult in a long while. My main assertion is he needs to change his approach if he is going to make this program elite. He has had a taste (CPF in 2016) of what is required at that level, but so far I'm not seeing sufficient evidence he will make the transition anytime soon. The Cal loss was a microcosm of what's still wrong with this program.
It's year 5, but then again, it's year 5. He inherited a bit of a train wreck, and had you? in the playoffs in fairly short order. There is no doubt Washington is in the best shape it's been in since James retired.
I'd deliberate for a very long time before coming to the conclusion that firing Petersen made any sense. But that's me.
It's hard to get it right at schools that can attract most anybody. Washington isn't one of those schools. They hate to hear it, but it's true.
Fire Peterman, and the odds of fucking it up on the next hire are north of 95%.
Washington has a shot at a title with Peterman as soon as something happens in Tuscaloosa to blow up that program.
Until then, it's Nick's world.
Mosster and the rest are too anxious to feed our anger at Pete -
Is anyone here that isn't a complete retard on the #firepete wagon yet? I don't think so.
There are there lots of us that want to see him make some serious changes to improve the program though.
Lots of people on the #firebonerpoper #fireGregory and #letgooftheoffensePete wagon. -
Really good data here. It appears that luck (or randomness if you prefer) is probably higher than #3 in deciding close games. So maybe QB, then luck/randomness, then in game coaching.FremontTroll said:
Good point. Another point to make is that these are very small sample sizes and we shouldn't be that amazed when a coin comes up heads 9 out of 10 flips.UWhuskytskeet said:Worth noting Pete rarely loses games by more than one score. Unless he's going undefeated every year, they are only going to come from one-score games.
2014: 6-3
2015: 6-3
2016: 10-2
2017: 9-0
2018: 4-0
23-2 since we've had a pulse.
Here is Saban's record in one-score games since 2014. Obviously better than Pete's, but still far lower than Saban's overall winning percentage. Point being, good teams only lose by one score.
2014: 3-2
2015: 1-1
2016: 1-1
2017: 3-0
2018: 0-0
8-4
Just a couple examples-
Mark D'Antonio- started career 6-12 in one score games then went 6-1 in 2015 to get to the CFP with a pretty overrated team. Those wins included Michigan botching a punt snap with 10 seconds left and Vernon Adams missing a wide open Byron Marshall in the final minute.
Gus Malzahn- started his head coaching career 12-1 in one score games.
His last 13? 3-10. -
creepycoug said:
Seriously. UW's rivals would collectively cheer quite enthusiastically if UW were to fire Peterman. -
I honestly don't disagree.creepycoug said:
I can respect that, but I warn you that you will be in a small and lonely group in that case.Homebrew_Dawg said:
The fallacy of this logic is it is exactly the same that was used to keep nonperforming coaches in their jobs, to the point no one wanted the job when Sarkisian came. Whether Pete runs the table and wins the Rose Bowl, which I believe is highly unlikely, my opinion of him would not change. In fact, I would be more frustrated at his squandering this season's opportunities.creepycoug said:
Petersen leaving UW would be a dark day for that program. Who else is coming?Homebrew_Dawg said:
His QB. His system. His recruiting. He's the CEO of the program. He's been repeatedly out coached in the bowl games and the loses this season. He has made his own bed, and we have to sleep in it until he changes or leaves.creepycoug said:
I always do. Thanks. Didn't say his play calling hasn't cost the DAWGS! a few close games. But his QB shitting himself is part of the number.Homebrew_Dawg said:
Big games, close games, no matter Pete loses more than he wins. He's been a loser at UW when it counts the most. Not a signature win in almost 5 years (except maybe Stanfurd 2016). Seems like a choker to me. But think what you will creepy. We can't help you.creepycoug said:
Record is very different with a different QB.YellowSnow said:Helps @creepycoug IMO
It's a little more on him than 'he's playing the hand he was dealt', but a lot of those losses are on browshoes. Pete doesn't take the snaps.
I don't think Pete's a choker.
He's also had really three chances for a 'signature win' by my count. The first one was forgivable; everybody loses to Alabama. The Auburn loss is a stinger, I agree.
Penn State is a hard one to score. PSU looked like the better team, but Pete made adjustments to keep it close.
First adult in the position in eons.
What happens if he runs the table and wins the Rose Bowl? All is forgiven?
I just don't see choker tag on Peterman.
I agree he is the first adult in a long while. My main assertion is he needs to change his approach if he is going to make this program elite. He has had a taste (CPF in 2016) of what is required at that level, but so far I'm not seeing sufficient evidence he will make the transition anytime soon. The Cal loss was a microcosm of what's still wrong with this program.
It's year 5, but then again, it's year 5. He inherited a bit of a train wreck, and had you? in the playoffs in fairly short order. There is no doubt Washington is in the best shape it's been in since James retired.
I'd deliberate for a very long time before coming to the conclusion that firing Petersen made any sense. But that's me. -
dOgmaster said:
Alex, I will take ‘Things that only matter to AD’s of losing programs’ for $200.sarktastic said:-GPA
- Minimal arrests/issues
-winning overall record
- beats Cuog
-bowl game every year
-highest APR in the conference
-AD Leadership mentor
-revenues have never been higher -
Funny but no. Peterman cares about that shit as well.dOgmaster said:
Alex, I will take ‘Things that only matter to AD’s’ for $200.sarktastic said:-GPA
- Minimal arrests/issues
-winning overall record
- beats Cuog
-bowl game every year
-highest APR in the conference
-AD Leadership mentor
-revenues have never been higher -
I hate you race. I think Kanye makes a song about this.RaceBannon said:Hate makes me stronger
-
Isnt a w a w yella? You're starting to sound like a cunt around here.YellowSnow said:Helps @creepycoug IMO
-
8-11 bitch!
