2009 new coaches - how Sark compares

PolkHigh33

I am not sure if it's been discussed anywhere, but I was curious how Sark has compared to the other new coaches (new to their team, not first coaching stint). Sark has the 9th highest winning percentage of the 21 coaches. Arguments could be made either way: It should be higher (it should), or the other coaches inherited shittier situations with less talent. Here's the info:

TEAM COACH 2009 2010 2011 2012 Total
Army Rich Ellerson 5-7 7-6 3-9 2-10 17-31 .354
Auburn Gene Chizik 8-5 14-0 8-5 3-9 33-19 .635 2010 National Champs*, fired
Ball State Stan Parrish 2-10 4-8 6-18 .250 Fired
Boston College Frank Spaziani 8-5 7-6 4-8 2-10 22-29 .431 Fired
Bowling Green Dave Clawson 7-6 2-10 5-7 8-5 22-28 .444
Clemson Dabo Swinney 9-5 6-7 10-4 11-2 36-18 .667
Eastern Michigan Ron English 0-12 2-10 6-6 2-10 10-38 .208
Iowa State Paul Rhoads 7-6 5-7 6-7 6-7 24-27 .471
Kansas State Bill Snyder 6-6 7-6 10-3 11-2 34-21 .618
Miami (O.) Michael Haywood 1-11 9-4 10-15 .400 Moved to Pitt
Mississippi State Dan Mullen 5-7 9-4 7-6 8-5 29-22 .567
New Mexico Mike Locksley 1-11 1-11 0-4 2-26 .071 Fired in season
New Mexico St DeWayne Walker 3-10 2-10 4-9 1-11 10-40 .200 "quit"
Oregon Chip Kelly 10-3 12-1 12-2 12-1 46-7 .870 Phi Eagles coach
Purdue Danny Hope 5-7 4-8 7-6 6-6 22-27 .449 fired
San Diego State Brady Hoke 4-8 9-4 13-12 .520 went to Michigan
Syracuse Doug Marrone 4-8 8-5 5-7 8-5 25-25 .500 HC for Buffalo Bills
Toledo Tim Beckman 5-7 8-5 8-4 21-16 .568 left for Illinois
Utah State Gary Andersen 4-8 4-8 7-6 11-2 26-24 .542 HC at Wisconsin
Washington Steve Sarkisian 5-7 7-6 7-6 7-6 26-25 .510
Wyoming Dave Christensen 7-6 3-9 8-5 4-7 22-27 .449

PolkHigh33

Well, that pasted a whole hell of a lot worse than it was when I wrote it.

AtomicPiss

Bill Snyder/Kansas St is what I would have expected from Sark, Mora or whomever we hired

CFetters_Nacho_Lover

2 things stick out to me in this poast:

1. There weren't a lot of quality coaches hired in 2009. That might be true for every year of new coaches but Sark at .510 is 9th best? wow.

2. The .510 next to Sark's name couldn't scream mediocrity any louder. Maybe 7 Win Steve busts out a 10 or 11 win season and gets UW to the PAC 12 championship game and even the Rose Bowl. I wouldn't bet on it but it could happen.

RoadDawg55

I may be in the minority, but I think Sark has been a good transition coach. It's pretty evident to me that he is never going to be any better than average, but he has done some good things. He initially borught energy back, the talent has improved (OL and DL still need a lot of work) and he has brought the program back to a point where good coaches would be interested in coming here.

With the new stadium and all the money being thrown around, there is no reason we cannot get a good coach in here to replace Sark. Now we just need Woody to grow some balls after we go 7-6 again this year. We will not reach the next level under Sark.

RaceBannon

Why did we need a transitional coach? Do real football schools do that?

CirrhosisDawg

UW needs President Michael Young to prioritize the necessary order of change.
1. Woodward (not a real AD)
2. Sark (not a real Pac-12 HC)
3. Romar (unfortunately, if another NIT or worse season happens in 2013-14)

UW is just spinning its wheels until Woodward is axed.

CheersWestDawg

Woody hired Lindsay Meggs to be UW's baseball coach in July of 2009...and here is UW's conference records since (keep in mind it's been an 11-team conference since 2012 - Colorado doesn't field a team):
2010: 7-17 (9th)
2011: 6-21 (10th)
2012: 13-17 (7th)
After the 2012 season, Woody extended Meggs through the 2018 season.
2013: So far, 3-9 (11th)

If Pool Boy can't fire this fuckwad, you think he'll ever fire a football coach that he hired that goes 7-6 every year?

RoadDawg55

RaceBannon said:

Why did we need a transitional coach? Do real football schools do that?

Fair point, and not to sound like Kim, but quality coaches were not exactly beating down the door to come here. Mora obviously should have been the choice after the 2007 season, but we all know about that bullshit.

I am glad we hired Sark instead of Pat Hill, Leach, or some other coaching "journeyman" we could have gotten. Let me be clear, I don't like Sark at all. I think almost everything about him is fraudulent and he is an average (at best) coach. However, I do think he has done enough to put the pieces in place for the program to have success, albeit without him as head coach.

Real football schools make mistakes hiring guys all the time. Florida hired Ron Zook, Michigan hired Rich Rod, Alabama hired Mike Price and Shula, USC hired Kiffin, etc. No school has sustained success without at least a very good coach, even the elite schools. Sometimes you have to hire and fire until you find the right guy.

MikeDamone

The old "no one else would take the job" line.

It's no ones fault, Sark was the best that would take the job, woody did a hell of a job just to get him, sark gets it....

Yes, you do sound like Kim.

RoadDawg55

MikeDamone said:

The old "no one else would take the job" line.

It's no ones fault, Sark was the best that would take the job, woody did a hell of a job just to get him, sark gets it....

Yes, you do sound like Kim.

You're an idiot. I don't think "no one else would take the job", but the top guys seemed to not want the job. Good coaches do not normally leave their cush jobs for a team that went 0-12. I would love for you to show me some examples where they do. Sark was not the first choice, but the choice after other coaches rebuffed UW's offer. I am not sure if Sark is the best we could have done (probably not), but I will take a young coordinator with potential over a shitty coach like Pat Hill, Tom O'Brien, etc. It was a risk that has not entirely worked out, but it has not been the disaster some of you make it out to be.

Could we not attract a better coach now then in 2008? There's more money, a new stadium, and while the program is not in great shape, it is in much better shape than it was after the 2008 season. All we need is the right coach, and I think we are much more capable of finding him now then we were in 2008.

MikeDamone

You said you were risking sounding like kim. I simply agreed. You sounded like Kim. And I'm the idiot? Fuck off.

Steve_Bowman

I don't know if we needed a transitional coach like Cream Puff, but we're in good shape to hire a real coach, and keep trying till we get it right.

RoadDawg55

MikeDamone said:

You said you were risking sounding like kim. I simply agreed. You sounded like Kim. And I'm the idiot? Fuck off.

Like I said, show me some examples where established coaches leave their jobs for a program that went 0-12. I never said, "Yay Woody", "Sark gets it", or any of that shit. Coordinators and average head coaches seemed to be the ones interested in the job in 2008. To the best of my knowledge, we tried to hire Brian Kelly, Will Muschamp, and Chris Peterson and were turned down by each of them. I could be wrong considering I don't have "inside sources" privy to what was going on with the search, but common sense tells me a team that went 0-12 is not going to have great coaches drooling over the opportunity to coach that team.

RaccoonHarry

RaceBannon said:

Why did we need a transitional coach? Do real football schools do that?

To answer your question, NO - "real" football schools don't hire transition coaches. However, in the wake of the Tyrone era it could be argued UW ceased to be a real football school. I would think the jury is still out on whether Sark is a transition coach or a real coach, my personal opinion tending toward the former. For those really into the whole "win/lose" thing this coming season may tell us all we need to know. I do hear he's nice to his wife and sends his mom flowers every Mother's Day...

RaceBannon

If you can't post without personal attacks you small dicked fucking retards might get your ugly ass run

ACSlaterDawg

RoadDawg is right. Its not the company line here but he's right.

Woody said he wanted a DC type for HC. He offered Muschamp first. He interviewed the other guys and pursued Mora hard, but Mora decided no. We all knew at the time this wasn't a 0 win team but probably a 4-5 win team to begin with. But when you've gone 1-2-5-4-0 in your last 5 years, the outside impression is its going to be a major rebuild.

At least Sark injected some enthusiasm into the program, helped raised the talent level (with a major helping hand) and raised expectations right away.

Problem is he'll never be a championship coach as his teams are sloppy, undisciplined, soft and inconsistent. They either need to fire him or push him out if UW has more success.

AtomicPiss

I don't think Sark injected any enthusiasm into the program other than the over the top adulation by a core of fans that were like battered wives after Tyrone. If season tickets are a barometer, there wasn't an uptick after he took over.

I think to say "at least Sark injected some enthusiasm into the program" is on par with those that said at least Willingham cleaned up the program -- gotta give him credit for that. (I even wrote that in Dec 2007 when publicly pleading for Mora).

TierbsHsotBoobs

Real football schools don't intentionally hire transitional coaches....they also sure as fuck don't keep transitional coaches this long.

TierbsHsotBoobs

DerekJohnson said:

I don't think Sark injected any enthusiasm into the program other than the over the top adulation by a core of fans that were like battered wives after Tyrone. If season tickets are a barometer, there wasn't an uptick after he took over.

I think to say "at least Sark injected some enthusiasm into the program" is on par with those that said at least Willingham cleaned up the program -- gotta give him credit for that. (I even wrote that in Dec 2007 when publicly pleading for Mora).

Gilbertson's program was cleaner than Willingham's. Check the facts.

AtomicPiss

TierbsHsotBoobs said:

DerekJohnson said:

I don't think Sark injected any enthusiasm into the program other than the over the top adulation by a core of fans that were like battered wives after Tyrone. If season tickets are a barometer, there wasn't an uptick after he took over.

I think to say "at least Sark injected some enthusiasm into the program" is on par with those that said at least Willingham cleaned up the program -- gotta give him credit for that. (I even wrote that in Dec 2007 when publicly pleading for Mora).

Gilbertson's program was cleaner than Willingham's. Check the facts.

You're talking to a guy who went on to write a book about it.