Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

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

"Around-the-block" Coordinator Hires...lol

2

Comments

  • RaceBannonRaceBannon Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 104,355 Founders Club
    dnc said:

    Arizona hung 50 on him

    So did Oregon in a 7-6 campaign with a loss to coog


    Yep, he wasn't perfect.

    He was a huge upgrade though.

    Biggest reason 7 win Sark had a team win 9.

    That wasn't happening with Holt.
    I'll allow it
  • bananasnblondesbananasnblondes Member Posts: 15,040

    chuck said:

    I think the overarching point is correct. It always comes back to the head coach.

    You can tell good assistants from really bad ones in most cases though. Wilcox is a good defensive coach. It wasn't hard to see the immediate improvement over Holt.

    My guess is that Petersen would have had similarly good defenses at UW with Wilcox as DC as he had with Kawasaki. There's a hell of a lot more to it than scheme. The HC is responsible for the culture, work ethic and all that other gay stuff but he's also ultimately responsible for the personnel. Petersen was a good roster builder. Sark was not.

    I expect Texas and Sark to still give up 50 to Oklahoma even with Kwat even with Herman players

    Sounds like I agree with you
    Yeah, I am fully expecting Kwat to become Sark's first scapegoat.
  • dncdnc Member Posts: 56,614

    dnc said:

    Arizona hung 50 on him

    So did Oregon in a 7-6 campaign with a loss to coog


    Yep, he wasn't perfect.

    He was a huge upgrade though.

    Biggest reason 7 win Sark had a team win 9.

    That wasn't happening with Holt.
    8 wins. Tui got win number 9.
    Yes.

    But who was Tui's DC?

    They weren't winning that game with Holt either.

    Wilcox was the biggest reason that team was better than all Sark's others. It wasn't like Price took a step forward under Tui.
  • RaceBannonRaceBannon Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 104,355 Founders Club
    dnc said:

    dnc said:

    Arizona hung 50 on him

    So did Oregon in a 7-6 campaign with a loss to coog


    Yep, he wasn't perfect.

    He was a huge upgrade though.

    Biggest reason 7 win Sark had a team win 9.

    That wasn't happening with Holt.
    8 wins. Tui got win number 9.
    Yes.

    But who was Tui's DC?

    They weren't winning that game with Holt either.

    Wilcox was the biggest reason that team was better than all Sark's others. It wasn't like Price took a step forward under Tui.
    The mantra was that the offense would keep scoring and Wilcocks would fix the defense and rainbows and unicorns would appear

    Like any bad team the defense did improve, not against Oregon and nothing else matters, but the offense was worse

    So 7 > 7
  • RaceBannonRaceBannon Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 104,355 Founders Club
  • theknowledgetheknowledge Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 4,772 Founders Club
    Sark was a great OC for Carrol and Saban, he was an average to below average OC at UW and with the Atlanta Falcons. Wilcox was a great DC (top ten defenses) under Peterman and Chryst and good(UW)/average(USC) DC under Sark and Derek Dooley at UT. I fully expect that the bend but don’t break, twelve play drive, hold em to a FG defense of Kwat will be a poor match with the all gas no breaks offense of Sark. Unless Kwat runs a defense completely different from what he ran at Bose/UW or Sark runs an offense completely different from what got him his job at Texas the two styles can’t mesh. Ive got my popcorn ready though.
    CantwaitGIF
  • dncdnc Member Posts: 56,614

    Sark was a great OC for Carrol and Saban, he was an average to below average OC at UW and with the Atlanta Falcons. Wilcox was a great DC (top ten defenses) under Peterman and Chryst and good(UW)/average(USC) DC under Sark and Derek Dooley at UT. I fully expect that the bend but don’t break, twelve play drive, hold em to a FG defense of Kwat will be a poor match with the all gas no breaks offense of Sark. Unless Kwat runs a defense completely different from what he ran at Bose/UW or Sark runs an offense completely different from what got him his job at Texas the two styles can’t mesh. Ive got my popcorn ready though.
    CantwaitGIF

    I don't think Sark was a great OC for Carroll. It was a big reason I wasn't a big fan of the hire.
  • 1to392831weretaken1to392831weretaken Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 7,493 Swaye's Wigwam

    JonDon can be an underwhelming hire and still be an upgrade over what we had every year of Pete's tenure (minus the year Tedford was here). That's because Lake has a better philosophy for a modern offense than what we watched under Pete

    Two dives and then play action from under center on 3rd and long is modern?
  • CFetters_Nacho_LoverCFetters_Nacho_Lover Moderator, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 29,859 Founders Club
    edited August 2021
    Around the block coordinators >>> around the way girls.
  • chuckchuck Member, Moderator, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 10,922 Swaye's Wigwam

    chuck said:

    I think the overarching point is correct. It always comes back to the head coach.

    You can tell good assistants from really bad ones in most cases though. Wilcox is a good defensive coach. It wasn't hard to see the immediate improvement over Holt.

    My guess is that Petersen would have had similarly good defenses at UW with Wilcox as DC as he had with Kawasaki. There's a hell of a lot more to it than scheme. The HC is responsible for the culture, work ethic and all that other gay stuff but he's also ultimately responsible for the personnel. Petersen was a good roster builder. Sark was not.

    I expect Texas and Sark to still give up 50 to Oklahoma even with Kwat even with Herman players

    Sounds like I agree with you
    Yes, just not on the Wilcox-Holt part. There was definitely a difference.

    Kwat made a pretty dumb move on the surface if one assumes that he's working on his resume. His defense will struggle with Sark as the HC. It doesn't seem to matter though. He can always fail upward like his new boss keeps doing.
  • RaceBannonRaceBannon Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 104,355 Founders Club
    I'm not willing to die on the Wilcocks hill I just like calling him Wilcocks and don't want him here if/when Jimmy fails

    @dnc is riii righ right but still
  • chuckchuck Member, Moderator, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 10,922 Swaye's Wigwam

    I'm not willing to die on the Wilcocks hill I just like calling him Wilcocks and don't want him here if/when Jimmy fails

    @dnc is riii righ right but still

    I dont want Wilcox back at UW as head coach either. He would be a better hire than Sark was, but that's faint praise.
  • dncdnc Member Posts: 56,614

    I'm not willing to die on the Wilcocks hill I just like calling him Wilcocks and don't want him here if/when Jimmy fails

    @dnc is riii righ right but still

    I supper superior culture
  • RaceBannonRaceBannon Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 104,355 Founders Club
    dnc said:

    I'm not willing to die on the Wilcocks hill I just like calling him Wilcocks and don't want him here if/when Jimmy fails

    @dnc is riii righ right but still

    I supper superior culture
    That's why I don't want him

    Even with superior culture his record is meh

    Reminds me of "Gilby didn't have the support he needed at Cal but he will do great at UW!"

    @BearsWiin
  • dncdnc Member Posts: 56,614

    dnc said:

    I'm not willing to die on the Wilcocks hill I just like calling him Wilcocks and don't want him here if/when Jimmy fails

    @dnc is riii righ right but still

    I supper superior culture
    That's why I don't want him

    Even with superior culture his record is meh

    Reminds me of "Gilby didn't have the support he needed at Cal but he will do great at UW!"

    @BearsWiin
    I wouldn't really want him. I do think he'd be an improvement over Jimmy and one of the few ones you can realistically imagine Jen pursuing.

    I don't think he'd be the next great Husky coach though.

    TPIO
  • RaceBannonRaceBannon Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 104,355 Founders Club
    Upvote but don't think he'd be an improvement

    Let's circle back this November
  • theknowledgetheknowledge Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 4,772 Founders Club
    dnc said:

    Sark was a great OC for Carrol and Saban, he was an average to below average OC at UW and with the Atlanta Falcons. Wilcox was a great DC (top ten defenses) under Peterman and Chryst and good(UW)/average(USC) DC under Sark and Derek Dooley at UT. I fully expect that the bend but don’t break, twelve play drive, hold em to a FG defense of Kwat will be a poor match with the all gas no breaks offense of Sark. Unless Kwat runs a defense completely different from what he ran at Bose/UW or Sark runs an offense completely different from what got him his job at Texas the two styles can’t mesh. Ive got my popcorn ready though.
    CantwaitGIF

    I don't think Sark was a great OC for Carroll. It was a big reason I wasn't a big fan of the hire.
    I concede it was a stretch for the sake of my argument. The Carroll/Sark offenses were boring and worked like Novocain as they slowly overwhelmed you with superior athletes. The Chow years were much more dynamic or as dynamic as Carroll would allow an offense to be anyway.
Sign In or Register to comment.