Fact is, the battle was waged and Sark won... if we aren't going to keep score, why count stars and award recruiting trophies?
USC has recruited higher rated players than the UW for 50 years, and always will. What a riduculous comparison.
The UW did better than USC on the field sometimes, by developing players better. But USC has always had better raw material in terms of recruiting players. It has nothing to do with Sark. Kiffin also outrecruited Sark when it was USC versus UW. The comparison between schools is almost meaningless.
Sark is a good recruiter though. That is also not the issue. The problem is that he does not develop players well. We will see the difference in 2-4 years. Petersen's lower ranked recruits will be beating Sark's top 10 recruiting class in 2-4 years.
I think it's your responsibility to provide Star stats on the last 50 years of recruiting classes before making these incredible claims.
I saw this article on stars. Does a decent job summarizing. 5 stars give you 40-50% chance of getting to the NFL. That's pretty good. The rest is a crapshoot.
Until somebody can tell me how many recruiting stars John Wayne had before he starred at USC, I say all star ratings have to suck for credibility. Anything goes in Hollywood.
I think it's your responsibility to provide Star stats on the last 50 years of recruiting classes before making these incredible claims.
Really? I don't think so, because anyone who knows squat about college recruiting and the PAC12 knows that USC has the easiest job of recruiting due to location, and pedigree.
So no, I don't have to prove that USC has generally recruited better than everyone else in the PAC12 for decades, because it is common knowledge. Except for a few years around the NC, even DJ had to beat USC with lesser talented raw material, and he often did.
So if you want to prove me wrong, give it a shot. BTW, there have not been stars for 50 years. I said USCs players were more highly rated.
Knock yourself out, and learn something in the process. Here is the last 12 years. Show us all how many times the UW had a better recruiting class than USC, and for that matter when anyone in the PAC12 had a better recruiting class than USC. UCLA does occasionally, and while USC has had sanctions they have not done as well so Stanford has also challenged.
But educate yourself even with recent history, then if you still insist on being stupid, we can go back further in history.
In the olden days when Race was young, they wrote letters that got delivered by the Post Office. And they read newspapers with stories about HS kids written by reporters. Nobody had any idea what was going on in other parts of the country. They had to use telephones plugged into the wall and call the operator to call long distance. I don't know how they did it.
I think it's your responsibility to provide Star stats on the last 50 years of recruiting classes before making these incredible claims.
Really? I don't think so, because anyone who knows squat about college recruiting and the PAC12 knows that USC has the easiest job of recruiting due to location, and pedigree.
So no, I don't have to prove that USC has generally recruited better than everyone else in the PAC12 for decades, because it is common knowledge. Except for a few years around the NC, even DJ had to beat USC with lesser talented raw material, and he often did.
So if you want to prove me wrong, give it a shot. BTW, there have not been stars for 50 years. I said USCs players were more highly rated.
Knock yourself out, and learn something in the process. Here is the last 12 years. Show us all how many times the UW had a better recruiting class than USC, and for that matter when anyone in the PAC12 had a better recruiting class than USC. UCLA does occasionally, and while USC has had sanctions they have not done as well so Stanford has also challenged.
But educate yourself even with recent history, then if you still insist on being stupid, we can go back further in history.
You may want to stop posting for awhile until you get a feel for this place. If you need a hand, just PM Irish doog, he has this place dialed in.
Global is just another Doogman troll trying to make HH look bad.
Nice one, but so ignorant that it is not close. I have not been on Doogman in more than 10 years, ns stopped paying those fools in 2002. If you have paid any attention at all -- which obviously you have not -- you will often see me complaining about how much people here are obsessed by Doogman. I got over them long ago.
But again, Sark-whatever is avoiding the issue - He is asserting that the UW should out recruit USC and that Petersen has failed because Sark at USC pulled in a higher starred class.
Now he has to prove to us when that has EVER happened. Otherwise, as we already know, he is just blowing smoke out of his ass.
Sarkasskisser, Dude, you made the claim. The claim was that since your bro Sark brought in more stars than Petersen, the debate was over and your sweet Sark is better.
I demonstrated that USC ALWAYS recruits better than the UW, regardless of coach, so your claim is meaningless, ignorant, and full of shit.
You can prove you have a point only by demonstrating that the UW has out recruited USC. Of course, you would need to show that the UW has a strong history of beating USC in recruiting to have your sark/Pete claim make any sense. But let's first see if you can find one year where the UW has beaten USC in the recruiting rankings. If Sark is so good, surely he beat Kiffen or Carroll? Or maybe you think Neuheisel beat the USC coaches he faced? Or maybe you think it was DJ?
So which Washington coach or coaches has out recruited their USC counterpart? That is the only support for your fucking stupid assertion that Sark won some competition. Of course, USC always wins, which is what I stated, but like the dumb fuck you are, you are pretending to avoid the question, when actually you have been caught with Sark's dick in your mouth.
Sarkasskisser, Dude, you made the claim. The claim was that since your bro Sark brought in more stars than Petersen, the debate was over and your sweet Sark is better.
I demonstrated that USC ALWAYS recruits better than the UW, regardless of coach, so your claim is meaningless, ignorant, and full of shit.
You can prove you have a point only by demonstrating that the UW has out recruited USC. Of course, you would need to show that the UW has a strong history of beating USC in recruiting to have your sark/Pete claim make any sense. But let's first see if you can find one year where the UW has beaten USC in the recruiting rankings. If Sark is so good, surely he beat Kiffen or Carroll? Or maybe you think Neuheisel beat the USC coaches he faced? Or maybe you think it was DJ?
So which Washington coach or coaches has out recruited their USC counterpart? That is the only support for your fucking stupid assertion that Sark won some competition. Of course, USC always wins, which is what I stated, but like the dumb fuck you are, you are pretending to avoid the question, when actually you have been caught with Sark's dick in your mouth.
Now why am I surprised to see that once again you're too stupid to read what you wrote?
You made a claim you cannot back up, Kim. Your 'demonstration' is mearly your own opinion.
Sarkasskisser, it is common knowledge that USC always recruits higher ranked HS players than the UW. It always has.
I gave you twelve years where USC outrecruited the UW, just to back up what everyone except you already knows.
So the ball is in your court. Find us one year, any time in the last fifty years, where a UW coach outrecruited USC and got a recruiting class with higher ranked athletes than USC. Just one year.
One tip: Try google.
Another tip: You will need to take Sark's cock out of your mouth for five minutes to do it.
Comments
I saw this article on stars. Does a decent job summarizing. 5 stars give you 40-50% chance of getting to the NFL. That's pretty good. The rest is a crapshoot.
So no, I don't have to prove that USC has generally recruited better than everyone else in the PAC12 for decades, because it is common knowledge. Except for a few years around the NC, even DJ had to beat USC with lesser talented raw material, and he often did.
So if you want to prove me wrong, give it a shot. BTW, there have not been stars for 50 years. I said USCs players were more highly rated.
Knock yourself out, and learn something in the process. Here is the last 12 years. Show us all how many times the UW had a better recruiting class than USC, and for that matter when anyone in the PAC12 had a better recruiting class than USC. UCLA does occasionally, and while USC has had sanctions they have not done as well so Stanford has also challenged.
But educate yourself even with recent history, then if you still insist on being stupid, we can go back further in history.
Sark whatever - year by year, do some homework before shooting off your mouth.
I have been posting here for 13 months. I have a feel for this place, and dumb shits like you are part of the feel.
Irishdoog?
But again, Sark-whatever is avoiding the issue - He is asserting that the UW should out recruit USC and that Petersen has failed because Sark at USC pulled in a higher starred class.
Now he has to prove to us when that has EVER happened. Otherwise, as we already know, he is just blowing smoke out of his ass.
Or admit you were blowing smoke out of your butt.
Kim. Go home.
I demonstrated that USC ALWAYS recruits better than the UW, regardless of coach, so your claim is meaningless, ignorant, and full of shit.
You can prove you have a point only by demonstrating that the UW has out recruited USC. Of course, you would need to show that the UW has a strong history of beating USC in recruiting to have your sark/Pete claim make any sense. But let's first see if you can find one year where the UW has beaten USC in the recruiting rankings. If Sark is so good, surely he beat Kiffen or Carroll? Or maybe you think Neuheisel beat the USC coaches he faced? Or maybe you think it was DJ?
So which Washington coach or coaches has out recruited their USC counterpart? That is the only support for your fucking stupid assertion that Sark won some competition. Of course, USC always wins, which is what I stated, but like the dumb fuck you are, you are pretending to avoid the question, when actually you have been caught with Sark's dick in your mouth.
You made a claim you cannot back up, Kim. Your 'demonstration' is mearly your own opinion.
Now go home.
I gave you twelve years where USC outrecruited the UW, just to back up what everyone except you already knows.
So the ball is in your court. Find us one year, any time in the last fifty years, where a UW coach outrecruited USC and got a recruiting class with higher ranked athletes than USC. Just one year.
One tip: Try google.
Another tip: You will need to take Sark's cock out of your mouth for five minutes to do it.
Come on, Dude broh. Just five minutes on google! and give us a link with one year where a UW coach out recruited a USC coach based on rankings.
Put up, or shut the fuck up.