Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
The new Doog
Comments
-
Well he certainly is no Leach that is for sure but he is a lot better than Sark.salemcoog said:
I agree that you don't know what you really have in CP. And those that are cocksure that He's the savior are true Doogs.
But if ur gonna hate on swallowing.....
I'm out. -
92-12
-
"Hell, when is the last time we've won some key recruiting battles over OSU and Oregon in the same fucking year? "
Uh, when you were in like middle school we beat there ass like every year. We still kick OSU's ass in recruiting for the most part. .
" this coach deserves the benefit of the doubt for now. My senior year at UW was Sark's first..."
No shit?
-
Sarkingham said:
The new doogs are the people that blindly supported every single thing that Dude Brah did but are now questioning whether or not Petermen can get it done in the Pac12.
In other words, the new doogs are the same as the old doogs. -
Swing and a miss.salemcoog said:
I agree that you don't know what you really have in CP. And those that are cocksure that He's the savior are true Doogs.
But if ur gonna hate on swallowing.....
I'm out.
We know what we have. But its fine for you to think otherwise if you want. -
agree with that and agree w/ Race. Peterman has enough of a track record that he gets the benefit of the doubt. no doubt. and it's clear we have a grown up running things now. it was just as clear from the get-go that we didn't before.dnc said:
HRYKSarkingham said:The new doogs are the people that blindly supported every single thing that Dude Brah did but are now questioning whether or not Petermen can get it done in the Pac12.
In other words, the new doogs are the same as the old doogs.
These are the people who:
- Loved Lambo (#HiPLSS!)
- Hated Rick With The Rose Bowl.
- Loved Gilby and his TUFF questions.
- Loved Ty for cleaning up the program.
- Loved Rick Without the Rose Bowel.
= Aren't sure about Petersen.
Given their track record, I'd guess they're the ones who would have fired Don James after year 3/1988/abundance
one tiny little bit of doubt that lingers for me is this: he did what he did in totally different conference context than the Pac 12, and I thought Hawkins was a great coach too. not being negative, just observing the obvious there.
that said, yeah, there's reason to assume better things are on the way.
a doog is a doog is a doog. doesn't matter what era it is. there were Willingham doogs, if you can actually take yourself back far enough in time. -
Obvious correction.creepycoug said:
agree with that and agree w/ Race. Peterman has enough of a track record that he gets the benefit of the doubt. no doubt. and it's clear we have a grown up running things now. it was just as clear from the get-go that we didn't before.dnc said:
HRYKSarkingham said:The new doogs are the people that blindly supported every single thing that Dude Brah did but are now questioning whether or not Petermen can get it done in the Pac12.
In other words, the new doogs are the same as the old doogs.
These are the people who:
- Loved Lambo (#HiPLSS!)
- Hated Rick With The Rose Bowl.
- Loved Gilby and his TUFF questions.
- Loved Ty for cleaning up the program.
- Loved Rick Without the Rose Bowel.
= Aren't sure about Petersen.
Given their track record, I'd guess they're the ones who would have fired Don James after year 3/1988/abundance
one tiny little bit of doubt that lingers for me is this: he did what he did in totally different conference context than the Pac 12, and I thought Hawkins was a great coach too. not being negative, just observing the obvious there.
that said, yeah, there's reason to assume better things are on the way.
a doog is a doog is a doog. doesn't matter what era it is. there were Lambright doogs, if you can actually take yourself back far enough in time. -
We know Peterman will do just as well as SWS, and there's a 95% chance he will do better, incl. some ten win seasons, and probably a RB and top ten season every 3-5 years if not more frequently. Of course there's a chance of failure, but it seems very unlikely.
-
If coaching hires were always nothing but a pure crap shoot, schools would hire interns or assistant coaches and pay them bottom dollar.
Peetamus has a proven track record of winning big games and coaching up talent with the best.
The whole "He may be a better coach at small schools like BSU because he can't handle the pressure of big conference football" argument is one of the most fucking stupid things I have ever heard in my entire life. If you actually believe this shit please douse yourself in gasoline, ignite, and on the brink of death hurl yourself off the Aurora Bridge. Peterman might end up not working out but it won't be because of this fucking ridiculous narrative.
People also need to learn the difference between being optimistic and claiming National Titles and Rose Bowls. Don't get expecting 10+ wins a season twisted with claiming it will already happen.
I would say the mood right now around here is a very very optimistic LIPO. A lot of that was triggered by the fact that everyone thought fat fuck dude brah was going to be the UW coach for another 5+ years after Leach couldn't finish the job. -
I suppose it must be my upbringing which has taken longer than probably anybody else around here, but give me Bronco breath any day over scumbag. It's not the tradition of Trojan athletics coming to foul our turf by the lake that was so disgusting, but that a succession of UW presidents forced us for two decades to swallow USC's.... stain.
