Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.

The new Doog

13

Comments

  • Doogles
    Doogles Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 12,858 Founders Club
    Whittingham at Utah is a little alarming. After he curb stomped Bama in the Sugar Bowl I thought he was going to take over the south.

    LIPO
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • [Deleted User]
    [Deleted User] Posts: 11,453
    TierbsHsotBoobs said:

    creepycoug said:

    dnc said:

    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.

    HRYK

    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
    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.

    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.
    Obvious correction.
    PLSS silence in this thread speaks volumes.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • [Deleted User]
    [Deleted User] Posts: 11,453
    Doogles said:

    Whittingham at Utah is a little alarming. After he curb stomped Bama in the Sugar Bowl I thought he was going to take over the south.

    LIPO

    That's different because he had his MWC team and was put in a BCS conference. Like Peterman would struggle if Boise was immediately put into the Pac-12.

    Also prior to Whittingham Utah was BCS good already with Meyer while Boise wasn't.

    Lazy comparison.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • TierbsHsotBoobs
    TierbsHsotBoobs Member Posts: 39,680
    He_Needs_More_Time said:

    Doogles said:

    Whittingham at Utah is a little alarming. After he curb stomped Bama in the Sugar Bowl I thought he was going to take over the south.

    LIPO

    That's different because he had his MWC team and was put in a BCS conference. Like Peterman would struggle if Boise was immediately put into the Pac-12.

    Also prior to Whittingham Utah was BCS good already with Meyer while Boise wasn't.

    Lazy comparison.
    The fuck?

    2001 Boise State 8–4 6–2 2nd
    2002 Boise State 12–1 8–0 1st W Humanitarian 12 15
    2003 Boise State 13–1 8–0 1st W Fort Worth 15 16
    2004 Boise State 11–1 8–0 1st L Liberty 13 12
    2005 Boise State 9–4 7–1 T–1st L MPC Computers
    Boise State: 53–11 37–3
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • [Deleted User]
    [Deleted User] Posts: 11,453
    TierbsHsotBoobs said:

    He_Needs_More_Time said:

    Doogles said:

    Whittingham at Utah is a little alarming. After he curb stomped Bama in the Sugar Bowl I thought he was going to take over the south.

    LIPO

    That's different because he had his MWC team and was put in a BCS conference. Like Peterman would struggle if Boise was immediately put into the Pac-12.

    Also prior to Whittingham Utah was BCS good already with Meyer while Boise wasn't.

    Lazy comparison.
    The fuck?

    2001 Boise State 8–4 6–2 2nd
    2002 Boise State 12–1 8–0 1st W Humanitarian 12 15
    2003 Boise State 13–1 8–0 1st W Fort Worth 15 16
    2004 Boise State 11–1 8–0 1st L Liberty 13 12
    2005 Boise State 9–4 7–1 T–1st L MPC Computers
    Boise State: 53–11 37–3
    What part of "Also prior to Whittingham Utah was BCS good already with Meyer while Boise wasn't. " BCS good don't you understand?
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • TierbsHsotBoobs
    TierbsHsotBoobs Member Posts: 39,680
    He_Needs_More_Time said:

    TierbsHsotBoobs said:

    He_Needs_More_Time said:

    Doogles said:

    Whittingham at Utah is a little alarming. After he curb stomped Bama in the Sugar Bowl I thought he was going to take over the south.

    LIPO

    That's different because he had his MWC team and was put in a BCS conference. Like Peterman would struggle if Boise was immediately put into the Pac-12.

    Also prior to Whittingham Utah was BCS good already with Meyer while Boise wasn't.

    Lazy comparison.
    The fuck?

    2001 Boise State 8–4 6–2 2nd
    2002 Boise State 12–1 8–0 1st W Humanitarian 12 15
    2003 Boise State 13–1 8–0 1st W Fort Worth 15 16
    2004 Boise State 11–1 8–0 1st L Liberty 13 12
    2005 Boise State 9–4 7–1 T–1st L MPC Computers
    Boise State: 53–11 37–3
    What part of "Also prior to Whittingham Utah was BCS good already with Meyer while Boise wasn't. " BCS good don't you understand?
    Boise State was BCS good in 2003 and 2004. They just didn't get there because big school bias.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • doogsinparadise
    doogsinparadise Member Posts: 9,320
    A lot of people putting words in my mouth, did I say anythingc about Dude Brah?
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • CuntWaffle
    CuntWaffle Member Posts: 22,500
    doogsinparadise said:

    A lot of people putting words in my mouth, did I say anythingc about Dude Brah?

    So you are saying we are being a bunch of twisters?
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • HeretoBeatmyChest
    HeretoBeatmyChest Member Posts: 4,295
    Regarding the Wittingham comparison, I debunked it a while back with SRS data.

    In the 6 or so years prior to Wittingham, Utah averaged like 33rd while Boise was about the same in the years before Petersen. Wittingham prior to being in the Pac averaged about the same (33rd) while Petersen's average was 21.7 I believe. It was even better two years ago or one year ago.

    Utah in the Pac under Witt has averaged 49 which is a 16 pt difference. We could be generous and say that Boise might be about the same under Petersen in the pac. The reason might be because he'd average 8 wins a year with a tough schedule. He would get better players just as Wittingham has because of being in the pac-12.

    Bottom line, Wittingham's struggles are not applicable or predictive to Petersen's performance at UW.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter