Anyone else starting to think their is a succession agreement?
Comments
-
Like Muschamp and Hopkins?whuggy said:Between Pete and Jimmy with Jen's consent. Pete I'm sure isn't thrilled with what is necessary to take the step to the next level. He already hates the media stuff. Also seems Jimmy is very slow in taking the next step in his career. If he's still here in two years I think it's a valid hypothesis.
-
This.guntlove said:There was a lot of talk by Petersen after the Rose Bowl loss about reevaluating EVERYTHING they do on offense... trying to simplify things and really forge an identity on that side of the ball. All that talk was then followed by an utterly fucktarded and unnecessary QB competition in fall camp... then once the season began, we ran the same directionless, pointless, unnecessarily complicated bullshit on offense we'd seen the previous two seasons. Pete changed absolutely fucking nothing.
At this point, the only thing that will change my mind about Pete will be if Hamden is fired after the season and an OC is brought in from outside of Pete's coaching tree to run an entirely different offense. And if Bob Gregory is shitcanned. Those two things need to happen at the very fucking least. Otherwise, we will continue to lose 1-2 games every year against teams we have no business losing to, and we'll also continue to lose to every topflight program we play.
This is Pete's last real chance to show he's serious enough to the make the necessary changes to play for a championship. If he doesn't do it after this season, he's never doing it. Unfortunately if I was to put money on it, I'd say Hamden and Gregory will both be back next year. So basically, we fuct. -
This is a good post. I am very conflicted right now. Mostly I am just pissed off and wanting to throw things.DoogCourics said:
Every team in the country is scrambling to figure out which coach could get them a championship. Problem is, only Saban, Dabo, and Urban have been able to do it in the playoff era. Lots of splash hires around the country that don’t bear fruit. Lots of college football royalty trying desperately to figure out who that coach is that will bring them back to the promise land.whuggy said:
Swaye made a really good point when he said if you think Pete gives you a 1% chance to win it all and there's guys out there that give you 2% chance then you make the move every time. I have always liked Petersen but I'm starting to get interested in the 2% option. Who knows. Maybe JL bumps you up to 5%.PurpleBaze said:
Good poont!whuggy said:
On the other hand some of our non-coordinator hires haven't been too special either.PurpleBaze said:One more thing - UW hasn't had a good track record with promoting coordinators to the HC position.
Furthermore, one may surmise that the coordinators are cut from the same cloth as the head coach. So, promoting one of them to HC would just be more inbreeding. New boss same as the old boss scenario - I've seen this at my place of work. Our current CEO operates like the previous one, even though he is more personable and the former was kind of like a robot. Same policies and same playbook; same culture. Yes, he worked up the ranks and was promoted within.
UW AD has found so many different ways to burn us out over the years. May as well keep throwing shit at the wall to see what finally sticks.
Just so fucking tired and frustrated with a mediocre product.
We are all so frustrated and tired of inexplicable losses because we expect championships from Petersen. You could hire a shit load of dudes that won’t even get you consistent 10 win seasons, let alone expectations of a realistic shot at a championship. You could easily cycle through 6 coaches over 20 years trying to find that 2% option you’re talking about that can finally break through.
Petersen does 90% of things right which leads to consistency that I’ve been craving my whole adult life. It’s the 10% that fucks up the championship hopes I’ve been holding since I was a kid. Our only hope is that Petersen figures out the 10% and evolves.
That 10% is:
- In game decisions
- Letting go of the offense
- And recruiting at a top 10-15 level every year so the depth outweighs his coaching fuck ups
We are fucked. We have to hope he fucking evolves. Because otherwise you are Russian Rouletting yourself into putting yourself in the same 20 year shit we were in before we got Petersen and got expectations.
And for everyone who says “recruiting doesn’t matter you faggot, just win the games”. Yeah, well, the only team that has won a championship in the last two decades without being a top 10 recruiter or having top 10 composite talent is Clemson with a generational D Watson.
So with Pete’s development and Sam Huard who is our lord and savior, we could be 10-15.
But fuck off with this, “Fire Pete he cant get it don’t just go find someone who will”.
Where? Who? Who is that going to be? Because no one else can fucking find them. It’s fucking hard. Ask Michigan. They’ve been looking since 97. You don’t just boot someone who at least has that 1%, because barely anyone has that. Saban and Dabo and Urban rule the world. The rest of us are scrabbling for scraps.
Petersen won’t be fired, and even if he did who the fuck gives you a better chance.
He either evolves or he doesn’t and we are fucked. But if we go out and throw darts at a bored we are fucked anyway. So he needs to evolve.
Look, we aren't getting rid of him. I get it. And as much as I am pissed about this bullshit, that is probably the best idea. I wanted his ass fired Sunday, but I am an angry Injun who likes scalping whites - and Pete is as white bread as they come. A few days later I am still in full on "I hate Pete" mode, but brain synapses are now firing and I can see the logic in really hoping for that problematic 10% to change. I've said it, he is nails on the other 90%. But my issue with this logic that he probably shouldn't be canned is twofold.
1) We are HHBs, and if there is one thing about being an HHB it's demanding excellence and cutting bait when it isn't being met. So let's go to the tape (courtesy of PGOS):
Petersen is 2-4 against Oregon
Petersen is 2-4 against Stanford
Petersen is 2-3 against ASU
Petersen is 3-3 against Cal
Petersen is 0-2 against SEC teams
Petersen is 0-2 against good B1G teams
Petersen is 1-4 in Bowl Games
Take out everything else you think you know about Pete. Look at those numbers. Is that up to standards? It's not even close. It is objectively fucking terrible. This is a serious problem. He has feasted on beating up on the weakest Pac 12 of my lifetim and some scrub WAC programs. We are NEVER playing in a CFP or 3 straight NY6 games if the Oregon of 5 years ago or the USC of 12 years ago exist. This is a historically WEAK Pac-12 and we are getting good records beating up on shit teams, scheduling 2-3 for sure wins a year, and going sub .500 over 6 years against the ENTIRE Pac 12 North sans CUOG and Beav. Sure, ok, don't fire Pete, but WTF man? Being .500 against the Pac-12 North, losing all 4 games against the B1G and SEC, and going 1-4 in bowl games is shit.
TL;DR: Pete is not as "good" as his overall record indicates. This is a very average to slightly above average football team that has feasted on the Sisters of the Poor the last 6 years and gotten drilled whenever they play someone good.
2) Pete is stubborn. Everyone on this bored says it all the tim. It's the one thing we can agree on. Is it wise to wait for a few more years of data hoping that Pete makes the changes to erase that 10%? I don't know. At this point I find it unlikely he changes. I think it much more likely we continue to bounce between 8-5 and 11-2 winning the occasional shitty Pac-12 crown and getting ass blasted in any real bowel game.
So that's it. Yeah, I agree, Pete gets a couple more years to fix the 10% and unfuck this, but stop viewing him through purple colored glasses. This team is not as "good" as 3 Pac-12 Crowns in 6 years appears when you really look at the quality of the league and our scheduling, and our performance against "top teams" has been fucking abysmal.
So, I will grudgingly agree that it is a HUGE risk to go try to find lightning in a bottle with someone else, but there are clear warning signs here that must be dealt with now.
I'd give Pete a couple more years to see if he can work this out. But my patience for getting assblasted by shitty ass Cal every year is at an end. I hope Pete figures it out because 20 more years in the CFP wasteland would suck, but I'm with @Guntlove that we need to see changes NOW. Real changes. Not bandaid bullshit. Hamdan gone. Gregory gone. Minimum. A real signal that he is committed to a new way of doing business. I am past the "small measured" changes approach. Get your shit together Pete or put Swaye in charge!
-
Pete is starting to feel like Romar.all over again. I wanted Romar fired 4 years before it happened and didn't even watch a single hoops game his last 2 seasons. I hope that's not the case here, but that's the feeling I'm getting and it bums me out.
-
Brilliant post that perfectly encapsulates my feelings on the coaching situation right now. The scales have fallen from my eyes RE: Pete. I think a sizable part of my angst is I sometimes have a tendency to put certain individuals on pedestals, and when they fail (which people inevitably do) I don’t take it well. I saw him as the savior sent to us by St. Haden. He’s done a lot of good, but I question if he’ll get us to the national title promise land.Swaye said:
This is a good post. I am very conflicted right now. Mostly I am just pissed off and wanting to throw things.DoogCourics said:
Every team in the country is scrambling to figure out which coach could get them a championship. Problem is, only Saban, Dabo, and Urban have been able to do it in the playoff era. Lots of splash hires around the country that don’t bear fruit. Lots of college football royalty trying desperately to figure out who that coach is that will bring them back to the promise land.whuggy said:
Swaye made a really good point when he said if you think Pete gives you a 1% chance to win it all and there's guys out there that give you 2% chance then you make the move every time. I have always liked Petersen but I'm starting to get interested in the 2% option. Who knows. Maybe JL bumps you up to 5%.PurpleBaze said:
Good poont!whuggy said:
On the other hand some of our non-coordinator hires haven't been too special either.PurpleBaze said:One more thing - UW hasn't had a good track record with promoting coordinators to the HC position.
Furthermore, one may surmise that the coordinators are cut from the same cloth as the head coach. So, promoting one of them to HC would just be more inbreeding. New boss same as the old boss scenario - I've seen this at my place of work. Our current CEO operates like the previous one, even though he is more personable and the former was kind of like a robot. Same policies and same playbook; same culture. Yes, he worked up the ranks and was promoted within.
UW AD has found so many different ways to burn us out over the years. May as well keep throwing shit at the wall to see what finally sticks.
Just so fucking tired and frustrated with a mediocre product.
We are all so frustrated and tired of inexplicable losses because we expect championships from Petersen. You could hire a shit load of dudes that won’t even get you consistent 10 win seasons, let alone expectations of a realistic shot at a championship. You could easily cycle through 6 coaches over 20 years trying to find that 2% option you’re talking about that can finally break through.
Petersen does 90% of things right which leads to consistency that I’ve been craving my whole adult life. It’s the 10% that fucks up the championship hopes I’ve been holding since I was a kid. Our only hope is that Petersen figures out the 10% and evolves.
That 10% is:
- In game decisions
- Letting go of the offense
- And recruiting at a top 10-15 level every year so the depth outweighs his coaching fuck ups
We are fucked. We have to hope he fucking evolves. Because otherwise you are Russian Rouletting yourself into putting yourself in the same 20 year shit we were in before we got Petersen and got expectations.
And for everyone who says “recruiting doesn’t matter you faggot, just win the games”. Yeah, well, the only team that has won a championship in the last two decades without being a top 10 recruiter or having top 10 composite talent is Clemson with a generational D Watson.
So with Pete’s development and Sam Huard who is our lord and savior, we could be 10-15.
But fuck off with this, “Fire Pete he cant get it don’t just go find someone who will”.
Where? Who? Who is that going to be? Because no one else can fucking find them. It’s fucking hard. Ask Michigan. They’ve been looking since 97. You don’t just boot someone who at least has that 1%, because barely anyone has that. Saban and Dabo and Urban rule the world. The rest of us are scrabbling for scraps.
Petersen won’t be fired, and even if he did who the fuck gives you a better chance.
He either evolves or he doesn’t and we are fucked. But if we go out and throw darts at a bored we are fucked anyway. So he needs to evolve.
Look, we aren't getting rid of him. I get it. And as much as I am pissed about this bullshit, that is probably the best idea. I wanted his ass fired Sunday, but I am an angry Injun who likes scalping whites - and Pete is as white bread as they come. A few days later I am still in full on "I hate Pete" mode, but brain synapses are now firing and I can see the logic in really hoping for that problematic 10% to change. I've said it, he is nails on the other 90%. But my issue with this logic that he probably shouldn't be canned is twofold.
1) We are HHBs, and if there is one thing about being an HHB it's demanding excellence and cutting bait when it isn't being met. So let's go to the tape (courtesy of PGOS):
Petersen is 2-4 against Oregon
Petersen is 2-4 against Stanford
Petersen is 2-3 against ASU
Petersen is 3-3 against Cal
Petersen is 0-2 against SEC teams
Petersen is 0-2 against good B1G teams
Petersen is 1-4 in Bowl Games
Take out everything else you think you know about Pete. Look at those numbers. Is that up to standards? It's not even close. It is objectively fucking terrible. This is a serious problem. He has feasted on beating up on the weakest Pac 12 of my lifetim and some scrub WAC programs. We are NEVER playing in a CFP or 3 straight NY6 games if the Oregon of 5 years ago or the USC of 12 years ago exist. This is a historically WEAK Pac-12 and we are getting good records beating up on shit teams, scheduling 2-3 for sure wins a year, and going sub .500 over 6 years against the ENTIRE Pac 12 North sans CUOG and Beav. Sure, ok, don't fire Pete, but WTF man? Being .500 against the Pac-12 North, losing all 4 games against the B1G and SEC, and going 1-4 in bowl games is shit.
TL;DR: Pete is not as "good" as his overall record indicates. This is a very average to slightly above average football team that has feasted on the Sisters of the Poor the last 6 years and gotten drilled whenever they play someone good.
2) Pete is stubborn. Everyone on this bored says it all the tim. It's the one thing we can agree on. Is it wise to wait for a few more years of data hoping that Pete makes the changes to erase that 10%? I don't know. At this point I find it unlikely he changes. I think it much more likely we continue to bounce between 8-5 and 11-2 winning the occasional shitty Pac-12 crown and getting ass blasted in any real bowel game.
So that's it. Yeah, I agree, Pete gets a couple more years to fix the 10% and unfuck this, but stop viewing him through purple colored glasses. This team is not as "good" as 3 Pac-12 Crowns in 6 years appears when you really look at the quality of the league and our scheduling, and our performance against "top teams" has been fucking abysmal.
So, I will grudgingly agree that it is a HUGE risk to go try to find lightning in a bottle with someone else, but there are clear warning signs here that must be dealt with now.
I'd give Pete a couple more years to see if he can work this out. But my patience for getting assblasted by shitty ass Cal every year is at an end. I hope Pete figures it out because 20 more years in the CFP wasteland would suck, but I'm with @Guntlove that we need to see changes NOW. Real changes. Not bandaid bullshit. Hamdan gone. Gregory gone. Minimum. A real signal that he is committed to a new way of doing business. I am past the "small measured" changes approach. Get your shit together Pete or put Swaye in charge!
Oh, and OT: every time I see that little girl gif, it reminds me of a photo of myself at about the same age around Halloween.
Except my tutu was blue.
And I was crushing a beer can. -
That's fucking hot.Doog_de_Jour said:
Brilliant post that perfectly encapsulates my feelings on the coaching situation right now. The scales have fallen from my eyes RE: Pete. I think a sizable part of my angst is I sometimes have a tendency to put certain individuals on pedestals, and when they fail (which people inevitably do) I don’t take it well. I saw him as the savior sent to us by St. Haden. He’s done a lot of good, but I question if he’ll get us to the national title promise land.Swaye said:
This is a good post. I am very conflicted right now. Mostly I am just pissed off and wanting to throw things.
Look, we aren't getting rid of him. I get it. And as much as I am pissed about this bullshit, that is probably the best idea. I wanted his ass fired Sunday, but I am an angry Injun who likes scalping whites - and Pete is as white bread as they come. A few days later I am still in full on "I hate Pete" mode, but brain synapses are now firing and I can see the logic in really hoping for that problematic 10% to change. I've said it, he is nails on the other 90%. But my issue with this logic that he probably shouldn't be canned is twofold.
1) We are HHBs, and if there is one thing about being an HHB it's demanding excellence and cutting bait when it isn't being met. So let's go to the tape (courtesy of PGOS):
Petersen is 2-4 against Oregon
Petersen is 2-4 against Stanford
Petersen is 2-3 against ASU
Petersen is 3-3 against Cal
Petersen is 0-2 against SEC teams
Petersen is 0-2 against good B1G teams
Petersen is 1-4 in Bowl Games
Take out everything else you think you know about Pete. Look at those numbers. Is that up to standards? It's not even close. It is objectively fucking terrible. This is a serious problem. He has feasted on beating up on the weakest Pac 12 of my lifetim and some scrub WAC programs. We are NEVER playing in a CFP or 3 straight NY6 games if the Oregon of 5 years ago or the USC of 12 years ago exist. This is a historically WEAK Pac-12 and we are getting good records beating up on shit teams, scheduling 2-3 for sure wins a year, and going sub .500 over 6 years against the ENTIRE Pac 12 North sans CUOG and Beav. Sure, ok, don't fire Pete, but WTF man? Being .500 against the Pac-12 North, losing all 4 games against the B1G and SEC, and going 1-4 in bowl games is shit.
TL;DR: Pete is not as "good" as his overall record indicates. This is a very average to slightly above average football team that has feasted on the Sisters of the Poor the last 6 years and gotten drilled whenever they play someone good.
2) Pete is stubborn. Everyone on this bored says it all the tim. It's the one thing we can agree on. Is it wise to wait for a few more years of data hoping that Pete makes the changes to erase that 10%? I don't know. At this point I find it unlikely he changes. I think it much more likely we continue to bounce between 8-5 and 11-2 winning the occasional shitty Pac-12 crown and getting ass blasted in any real bowel game.
So that's it. Yeah, I agree, Pete gets a couple more years to fix the 10% and unfuck this, but stop viewing him through purple colored glasses. This team is not as "good" as 3 Pac-12 Crowns in 6 years appears when you really look at the quality of the league and our scheduling, and our performance against "top teams" has been fucking abysmal.
So, I will grudgingly agree that it is a HUGE risk to go try to find lightning in a bottle with someone else, but there are clear warning signs here that must be dealt with now.
I'd give Pete a couple more years to see if he can work this out. But my patience for getting assblasted by shitty ass Cal every year is at an end. I hope Pete figures it out because 20 more years in the CFP wasteland would suck, but I'm with @Guntlove that we need to see changes NOW. Real changes. Not bandaid bullshit. Hamdan gone. Gregory gone. Minimum. A real signal that he is committed to a new way of doing business. I am past the "small measured" changes approach. Get your shit together Pete or put Swaye in charge!
Oh, and OT: every time I see that little girl gif, it reminds me of a photo of myself at about the same age around Halloween.
Except my tutu was blue.
And I was crushing a beer can.
-
I'm not gonna look it up, but what was our record against those Pac12 teams and similar OOC competition the previous 10 years? 15? 20? How many three plus game loosing streaks did we? endure? How many plungers were forcibly inserted into our? anuses every year? How bad did we? loose to LSU, Oklahoma, Notre Dame, Nebraska, Oregon, Stanford, USC over those years? I still feel the ring sting. I guess a bunch of you love the way that feels because you have forgotten how this program was abused by any team with a pulse for almost 20 years. My alcoholic memory is not that good and can be untrustworthy at tims but going to the semi final, Rose Bowl and Fiesta Bowl and winning two out of three, four now, Pac 12 titles is #whyistayed.LebamDawg said:just to add some other stuff about Pete's losses
4 losses to Oregon, Stanford
3 Losses to ASU, Cal
one each UCLA, Arizona, Utah, and USC
OOC Boise ST and Auburn
Bowel game losses OK St, Pen St, Ohio St, Ala
and to offset those losses, Signature win USC -
I don't think it matters what our record was against those schools before. Petersen is supposed to be the guy that beats those teams, and he's not.theknowledge said:
I'm not gonna look it up, but what was our record against those Pac12 teams and similar OOC competition the previous 10 years? 15? 20? How many three plus game loosing streaks did we? endure? How many plungers were forcibly inserted into our? anuses every year? How bad did we? loose to LSU, Oklahoma, Notre Dame, Nebraska, Oregon, Stanford, USC over those years? I still feel the ring sting. I guess a bunch of you love the way that feels because you have forgotten how this program was abused by any team with a pulse for almost 20 years. My alcoholic memory is not that good and can be untrustworthy at tims but going to the semi final, Rose Bowl and Fiesta Bowl and winning two out of three, four now, Pac 12 titles is #whyistayed.LebamDawg said:just to add some other stuff about Pete's losses
4 losses to Oregon, Stanford
3 Losses to ASU, Cal
one each UCLA, Arizona, Utah, and USC
OOC Boise ST and Auburn
Bowel game losses OK St, Pen St, Ohio St, Ala
and to offset those losses, Signature win USC -
I am with you Yella. However there seems to be something off with the attitude or "culture" of the players. And I dont fucking understand it.YellowSnow said:
It was a coin flip game and ended as such. I can deal with this loss. Stanford and Cal are unacceptable. We can sit here as arm chair coaches and nit pick this or that but what ultimately matters is wins and losses and conference titles above all else. If he keeps winning the PAC 33.3% of the time he gets to stay. If not he can GTFO. Tick, tick, tick...FirePete said:
I don’t know, but something is wrong with the coaching staff. Too many missed assignments, poor tackling, poor game management, stubbornness not to admit something is wrong, but more importantly the lack of confidence and edge on the team. Second half agains Oregon was pure mental breakdown by the coaches and the playersYellowSnow said:
There’s really only been one guy in the past 30 yrs who was a slam dunk than Urbs going to tOSU. Saban had won a .5 natty but wasn’t GOAT yet. Harbaugh sucks. Chip 2.0 suck. Pete sucked through 2015. Now be sucks again.CuntWaffle said:Head coaching hires is always a crap shoot
This is why it’s more risk to @FirePete than stick it out for another 1- 2 years and see what happens.
If you have a proven upgrade over Pete that is a slam dunk that we can hire, let me know. I’m in. But that dude better fucking win big time or you’re gonna be meeting me and lil’ piss at 7-11. -
Just so you know. This is stupid
There is no agreement and getting rid of a head coach to hire one of his assistants who isn't doing his job is insane
Thanks for listening
