Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
Jen's desk cheat sheet coaches list
Comments
-
I can understand not liking the Deboer hire but I do not understand why people hold Matt Campbell on such a high pedestal in comparison.
-
I like Deboner now. I just like overreacting and melting down more.GreenRiverGatorz said:
Sure, and if that was the predetermined outcome we wouldn't be having this conversation. If you disagree with the probabilities that @1to392831weretaken is throwing out there, then fucking say so and engage with that. But at this point you're just a @backthepack minion regurgitating the same "big dick" nonsense.Houhusky said:
Small time pussy hedge type thinking.1to392831weretaken said:
I see you didn't read my guysm stuff. I think the monopoly money metaphor isn't a metaphor. It's a bubble that's going to pop. You can only keep kicking the can down the road for so long. How many multi-million dollar coaching contracts can be on your books at same time? Two? Three? There are two components to the hire, and one is being able to fire the fucker if he ends up sucking. These insane contracts are going to bite schools in the ass when this all comes crashing down and they can't afford to fire their loser coach because they're not bringing in enough gate and the TV money shrank instead of continuing to balloon.Houhusky said:Large universities have been playing with monopoly money for decades.
value bets are meaningless when you are betting pocket change, you just want to pick the winner, if it costs a few extra dollars who gives a fuck.
You pay what it takes to get YOUR GUY, hedging into the 3rd or 4th choice to save a few pennies in 2-4 years is fucking dumb.
Furthermore, your logic only makes sense when there's some amount of certainty that "picking the winner" is possible. In a system as chaotic and random as picking a winning coach, in which the difference between your first and second choice is $30 million but the difference between either guy's odds of winning are so nebulous that even a group of message board retards can't come to a consensus, value bets are plenty meaningful.
When playing my odds for program success, I'm going to take three whacks at DeBoner over one whack at Lincoln Riley, and that's about how the math works out.
"Three whacks at DeBoner" over the next decade is much more expensive to the program over "one whack at Lincoln Riley" for 2-3 years.
If you can't find someone you think is the best for the job and are instead trying to "value" hire just put Sven in charge for 10K and call it a day.
Its all random anyways, might as well hire NAIA coaches for the next hundred years for cheap because it will save money!
And tough fucking shit, because it's all moot. We don't have a fully guaranteed $100m to throw at a coach. We do in fact have much smaller dicks than USC and LSU, and if that's a surprise to you then you're a fucking idiot. The amount of dipshits here who appear to be shocked at the revelation that we stopped caring about football in the 90s is astounding. This isn't news. Look around. This is what we have and it's only going to get worse as the CFB parity gulf continues to widen. So either start a multi-billion dollar empire and give UW a slush fund to stay ahead in this sport, or just shut the fuck up already. -
UW knows their fan base don't they?
WE can't
-
UW got here by hiring 2nd and 3rd choices and making "safe" value bets. WE should keep doing that!GreenRiverGatorz said:
Sure, and if that was the predetermined outcome we wouldn't be having this conversation. If you disagree with the probabilities that @1to392831weretaken is throwing out there, then fucking say so and engage with that. But at this point you're just a @backthepack minion regurgitating the same "big dick" nonsense.Houhusky said:
Small time pussy hedge type thinking.1to392831weretaken said:
I see you didn't read my guysm stuff. I think the monopoly money metaphor isn't a metaphor. It's a bubble that's going to pop. You can only keep kicking the can down the road for so long. How many multi-million dollar coaching contracts can be on your books at same time? Two? Three? There are two components to the hire, and one is being able to fire the fucker if he ends up sucking. These insane contracts are going to bite schools in the ass when this all comes crashing down and they can't afford to fire their loser coach because they're not bringing in enough gate and the TV money shrank instead of continuing to balloon.Houhusky said:Large universities have been playing with monopoly money for decades.
value bets are meaningless when you are betting pocket change, you just want to pick the winner, if it costs a few extra dollars who gives a fuck.
You pay what it takes to get YOUR GUY, hedging into the 3rd or 4th choice to save a few pennies in 2-4 years is fucking dumb.
Furthermore, your logic only makes sense when there's some amount of certainty that "picking the winner" is possible. In a system as chaotic and random as picking a winning coach, in which the difference between your first and second choice is $30 million but the difference between either guy's odds of winning are so nebulous that even a group of message board retards can't come to a consensus, value bets are plenty meaningful.
When playing my odds for program success, I'm going to take three whacks at DeBoner over one whack at Lincoln Riley, and that's about how the math works out.
"Three whacks at DeBoner" over the next decade is much more expensive to the program over "one whack at Lincoln Riley" for 2-3 years.
If you can't find someone you think is the best for the job and are instead trying to "value" hire just put Sven in charge for 10K and call it a day.
Its all random anyways, might as well hire NAIA coaches for the next hundred years for cheap because it will save money!
And tough fucking shit, because it's all moot. We don't have a fully guaranteed $100m to throw at a coach. We do in fact have much smaller dicks than USC and LSU, and if that's a surprise to you then you're a fucking idiot. The amount of dipshits here who appear to be shocked at the revelation that we stopped caring about football in the 90s is astounding. This isn't news. Look around. This is what we have and it's only going to get worse as the CFB parity gulf continues to widen. So either start a multi-billion dollar empire and give UW a slush fund to stay ahead in this sport, or just shut the fuck up already.
You cant expect, need some perspective, THIS economy, they have a contract.
DIAFF doog. -
A doog thinks coaching prospects 2,000 miles away actually give a shit about UW and our second rate program.Houhusky said:
UW got here by hiring 2nd and 3rd choices and making "safe" value bets. WE should keep doing that!GreenRiverGatorz said:
Sure, and if that was the predetermined outcome we wouldn't be having this conversation. If you disagree with the probabilities that @1to392831weretaken is throwing out there, then fucking say so and engage with that. But at this point you're just a @backthepack minion regurgitating the same "big dick" nonsense.Houhusky said:
Small time pussy hedge type thinking.1to392831weretaken said:
I see you didn't read my guysm stuff. I think the monopoly money metaphor isn't a metaphor. It's a bubble that's going to pop. You can only keep kicking the can down the road for so long. How many multi-million dollar coaching contracts can be on your books at same time? Two? Three? There are two components to the hire, and one is being able to fire the fucker if he ends up sucking. These insane contracts are going to bite schools in the ass when this all comes crashing down and they can't afford to fire their loser coach because they're not bringing in enough gate and the TV money shrank instead of continuing to balloon.Houhusky said:Large universities have been playing with monopoly money for decades.
value bets are meaningless when you are betting pocket change, you just want to pick the winner, if it costs a few extra dollars who gives a fuck.
You pay what it takes to get YOUR GUY, hedging into the 3rd or 4th choice to save a few pennies in 2-4 years is fucking dumb.
Furthermore, your logic only makes sense when there's some amount of certainty that "picking the winner" is possible. In a system as chaotic and random as picking a winning coach, in which the difference between your first and second choice is $30 million but the difference between either guy's odds of winning are so nebulous that even a group of message board retards can't come to a consensus, value bets are plenty meaningful.
When playing my odds for program success, I'm going to take three whacks at DeBoner over one whack at Lincoln Riley, and that's about how the math works out.
"Three whacks at DeBoner" over the next decade is much more expensive to the program over "one whack at Lincoln Riley" for 2-3 years.
If you can't find someone you think is the best for the job and are instead trying to "value" hire just put Sven in charge for 10K and call it a day.
Its all random anyways, might as well hire NAIA coaches for the next hundred years for cheap because it will save money!
And tough fucking shit, because it's all moot. We don't have a fully guaranteed $100m to throw at a coach. We do in fact have much smaller dicks than USC and LSU, and if that's a surprise to you then you're a fucking idiot. The amount of dipshits here who appear to be shocked at the revelation that we stopped caring about football in the 90s is astounding. This isn't news. Look around. This is what we have and it's only going to get worse as the CFB parity gulf continues to widen. So either start a multi-billion dollar empire and give UW a slush fund to stay ahead in this sport, or just shut the fuck up already.
You cant expect, need some perspective, THIS economy, they have a contract.
DIAFF doog.
We're not big time, and haven't been for decades. Sorry you had to hear it from me. If you can't cope with it you can always kill yourself. -
And this is a sure recipe to make sure that doesn't changeGreenRiverGatorz said:
A doog thinks coaching prospects 2,000 miles away actually give a shit about UW and our second rate program.Houhusky said:
UW got here by hiring 2nd and 3rd choices and making "safe" value bets. WE should keep doing that!GreenRiverGatorz said:
Sure, and if that was the predetermined outcome we wouldn't be having this conversation. If you disagree with the probabilities that @1to392831weretaken is throwing out there, then fucking say so and engage with that. But at this point you're just a @backthepack minion regurgitating the same "big dick" nonsense.Houhusky said:
Small time pussy hedge type thinking.1to392831weretaken said:
I see you didn't read my guysm stuff. I think the monopoly money metaphor isn't a metaphor. It's a bubble that's going to pop. You can only keep kicking the can down the road for so long. How many multi-million dollar coaching contracts can be on your books at same time? Two? Three? There are two components to the hire, and one is being able to fire the fucker if he ends up sucking. These insane contracts are going to bite schools in the ass when this all comes crashing down and they can't afford to fire their loser coach because they're not bringing in enough gate and the TV money shrank instead of continuing to balloon.Houhusky said:Large universities have been playing with monopoly money for decades.
value bets are meaningless when you are betting pocket change, you just want to pick the winner, if it costs a few extra dollars who gives a fuck.
You pay what it takes to get YOUR GUY, hedging into the 3rd or 4th choice to save a few pennies in 2-4 years is fucking dumb.
Furthermore, your logic only makes sense when there's some amount of certainty that "picking the winner" is possible. In a system as chaotic and random as picking a winning coach, in which the difference between your first and second choice is $30 million but the difference between either guy's odds of winning are so nebulous that even a group of message board retards can't come to a consensus, value bets are plenty meaningful.
When playing my odds for program success, I'm going to take three whacks at DeBoner over one whack at Lincoln Riley, and that's about how the math works out.
"Three whacks at DeBoner" over the next decade is much more expensive to the program over "one whack at Lincoln Riley" for 2-3 years.
If you can't find someone you think is the best for the job and are instead trying to "value" hire just put Sven in charge for 10K and call it a day.
Its all random anyways, might as well hire NAIA coaches for the next hundred years for cheap because it will save money!
And tough fucking shit, because it's all moot. We don't have a fully guaranteed $100m to throw at a coach. We do in fact have much smaller dicks than USC and LSU, and if that's a surprise to you then you're a fucking idiot. The amount of dipshits here who appear to be shocked at the revelation that we stopped caring about football in the 90s is astounding. This isn't news. Look around. This is what we have and it's only going to get worse as the CFB parity gulf continues to widen. So either start a multi-billion dollar empire and give UW a slush fund to stay ahead in this sport, or just shut the fuck up already.
You cant expect, need some perspective, THIS economy, they have a contract.
DIAFF doog.
We're not big time, and haven't been for decades. Sorry you had to hear it from me. If you can't cope with it you can always kill yourself.
Lather rinse repeat -
I don't understand why our only choice was these two guysCuntWaffle said:I can understand not liking the Deboer hire but I do not understand why people hold Matt Campbell on such a high pedestal in comparison.
Typical UW false choice bullshit coaching search. Hell Wilcox was to scare everyone into a Mountain West hire and like it
Notre Dame may hire Campbell or they may come calling for DeBoer -
I like how you frame it as if there are variable outcomes here. There aren't. You of all people should know that. Unless you have a formula for changing the demographics and institutional apathy of a has-been football school. Then I'm all ears.RaceBannon said:
And this is a sure recipe to make sure that doesn't changeGreenRiverGatorz said:
A doog thinks coaching prospects 2,000 miles away actually give a shit about UW and our second rate program.Houhusky said:
UW got here by hiring 2nd and 3rd choices and making "safe" value bets. WE should keep doing that!GreenRiverGatorz said:
Sure, and if that was the predetermined outcome we wouldn't be having this conversation. If you disagree with the probabilities that @1to392831weretaken is throwing out there, then fucking say so and engage with that. But at this point you're just a @backthepack minion regurgitating the same "big dick" nonsense.Houhusky said:
Small time pussy hedge type thinking.1to392831weretaken said:
I see you didn't read my guysm stuff. I think the monopoly money metaphor isn't a metaphor. It's a bubble that's going to pop. You can only keep kicking the can down the road for so long. How many multi-million dollar coaching contracts can be on your books at same time? Two? Three? There are two components to the hire, and one is being able to fire the fucker if he ends up sucking. These insane contracts are going to bite schools in the ass when this all comes crashing down and they can't afford to fire their loser coach because they're not bringing in enough gate and the TV money shrank instead of continuing to balloon.Houhusky said:Large universities have been playing with monopoly money for decades.
value bets are meaningless when you are betting pocket change, you just want to pick the winner, if it costs a few extra dollars who gives a fuck.
You pay what it takes to get YOUR GUY, hedging into the 3rd or 4th choice to save a few pennies in 2-4 years is fucking dumb.
Furthermore, your logic only makes sense when there's some amount of certainty that "picking the winner" is possible. In a system as chaotic and random as picking a winning coach, in which the difference between your first and second choice is $30 million but the difference between either guy's odds of winning are so nebulous that even a group of message board retards can't come to a consensus, value bets are plenty meaningful.
When playing my odds for program success, I'm going to take three whacks at DeBoner over one whack at Lincoln Riley, and that's about how the math works out.
"Three whacks at DeBoner" over the next decade is much more expensive to the program over "one whack at Lincoln Riley" for 2-3 years.
If you can't find someone you think is the best for the job and are instead trying to "value" hire just put Sven in charge for 10K and call it a day.
Its all random anyways, might as well hire NAIA coaches for the next hundred years for cheap because it will save money!
And tough fucking shit, because it's all moot. We don't have a fully guaranteed $100m to throw at a coach. We do in fact have much smaller dicks than USC and LSU, and if that's a surprise to you then you're a fucking idiot. The amount of dipshits here who appear to be shocked at the revelation that we stopped caring about football in the 90s is astounding. This isn't news. Look around. This is what we have and it's only going to get worse as the CFB parity gulf continues to widen. So either start a multi-billion dollar empire and give UW a slush fund to stay ahead in this sport, or just shut the fuck up already.
You cant expect, need some perspective, THIS economy, they have a contract.
DIAFF doog.
We're not big time, and haven't been for decades. Sorry you had to hear it from me. If you can't cope with it you can always kill yourself.
Lather rinse repeat -
Nothing we can do. Oregon invented a program from scratch but poor old UW just doesn't have the resources or desire to do so.GreenRiverGatorz said:
I like how you frame it as if there are variable outcomes here. There aren't. You of all people should know that. Unless you have a formula for changing the demographics and institutional apathy of a has-been football school. Then I'm all ears.RaceBannon said:
And this is a sure recipe to make sure that doesn't changeGreenRiverGatorz said:
A doog thinks coaching prospects 2,000 miles away actually give a shit about UW and our second rate program.Houhusky said:
UW got here by hiring 2nd and 3rd choices and making "safe" value bets. WE should keep doing that!GreenRiverGatorz said:
Sure, and if that was the predetermined outcome we wouldn't be having this conversation. If you disagree with the probabilities that @1to392831weretaken is throwing out there, then fucking say so and engage with that. But at this point you're just a @backthepack minion regurgitating the same "big dick" nonsense.Houhusky said:
Small time pussy hedge type thinking.1to392831weretaken said:
I see you didn't read my guysm stuff. I think the monopoly money metaphor isn't a metaphor. It's a bubble that's going to pop. You can only keep kicking the can down the road for so long. How many multi-million dollar coaching contracts can be on your books at same time? Two? Three? There are two components to the hire, and one is being able to fire the fucker if he ends up sucking. These insane contracts are going to bite schools in the ass when this all comes crashing down and they can't afford to fire their loser coach because they're not bringing in enough gate and the TV money shrank instead of continuing to balloon.Houhusky said:Large universities have been playing with monopoly money for decades.
value bets are meaningless when you are betting pocket change, you just want to pick the winner, if it costs a few extra dollars who gives a fuck.
You pay what it takes to get YOUR GUY, hedging into the 3rd or 4th choice to save a few pennies in 2-4 years is fucking dumb.
Furthermore, your logic only makes sense when there's some amount of certainty that "picking the winner" is possible. In a system as chaotic and random as picking a winning coach, in which the difference between your first and second choice is $30 million but the difference between either guy's odds of winning are so nebulous that even a group of message board retards can't come to a consensus, value bets are plenty meaningful.
When playing my odds for program success, I'm going to take three whacks at DeBoner over one whack at Lincoln Riley, and that's about how the math works out.
"Three whacks at DeBoner" over the next decade is much more expensive to the program over "one whack at Lincoln Riley" for 2-3 years.
If you can't find someone you think is the best for the job and are instead trying to "value" hire just put Sven in charge for 10K and call it a day.
Its all random anyways, might as well hire NAIA coaches for the next hundred years for cheap because it will save money!
And tough fucking shit, because it's all moot. We don't have a fully guaranteed $100m to throw at a coach. We do in fact have much smaller dicks than USC and LSU, and if that's a surprise to you then you're a fucking idiot. The amount of dipshits here who appear to be shocked at the revelation that we stopped caring about football in the 90s is astounding. This isn't news. Look around. This is what we have and it's only going to get worse as the CFB parity gulf continues to widen. So either start a multi-billion dollar empire and give UW a slush fund to stay ahead in this sport, or just shut the fuck up already.
You cant expect, need some perspective, THIS economy, they have a contract.
DIAFF doog.
We're not big time, and haven't been for decades. Sorry you had to hear it from me. If you can't cope with it you can always kill yourself.
Lather rinse repeat
The fans eat this shit up every time and make the excuses for the program so the AD doesn't have to
10 years 100 million dollars gets a coach.
If you want to go cheap the MAC is the cradle of coaches. The Mountain West is where coaches go to die. -
Some fans make excuses. Others are just in the acceptance phase of grieving over the death of UW football.RaceBannon said:
Nothing we can do. Oregon invented a program from scratch but poor old UW just doesn't have the resources or desire to do so.GreenRiverGatorz said:
I like how you frame it as if there are variable outcomes here. There aren't. You of all people should know that. Unless you have a formula for changing the demographics and institutional apathy of a has-been football school. Then I'm all ears.RaceBannon said:
And this is a sure recipe to make sure that doesn't changeGreenRiverGatorz said:
A doog thinks coaching prospects 2,000 miles away actually give a shit about UW and our second rate program.Houhusky said:
UW got here by hiring 2nd and 3rd choices and making "safe" value bets. WE should keep doing that!GreenRiverGatorz said:
Sure, and if that was the predetermined outcome we wouldn't be having this conversation. If you disagree with the probabilities that @1to392831weretaken is throwing out there, then fucking say so and engage with that. But at this point you're just a @backthepack minion regurgitating the same "big dick" nonsense.Houhusky said:
Small time pussy hedge type thinking.1to392831weretaken said:
I see you didn't read my guysm stuff. I think the monopoly money metaphor isn't a metaphor. It's a bubble that's going to pop. You can only keep kicking the can down the road for so long. How many multi-million dollar coaching contracts can be on your books at same time? Two? Three? There are two components to the hire, and one is being able to fire the fucker if he ends up sucking. These insane contracts are going to bite schools in the ass when this all comes crashing down and they can't afford to fire their loser coach because they're not bringing in enough gate and the TV money shrank instead of continuing to balloon.Houhusky said:Large universities have been playing with monopoly money for decades.
value bets are meaningless when you are betting pocket change, you just want to pick the winner, if it costs a few extra dollars who gives a fuck.
You pay what it takes to get YOUR GUY, hedging into the 3rd or 4th choice to save a few pennies in 2-4 years is fucking dumb.
Furthermore, your logic only makes sense when there's some amount of certainty that "picking the winner" is possible. In a system as chaotic and random as picking a winning coach, in which the difference between your first and second choice is $30 million but the difference between either guy's odds of winning are so nebulous that even a group of message board retards can't come to a consensus, value bets are plenty meaningful.
When playing my odds for program success, I'm going to take three whacks at DeBoner over one whack at Lincoln Riley, and that's about how the math works out.
"Three whacks at DeBoner" over the next decade is much more expensive to the program over "one whack at Lincoln Riley" for 2-3 years.
If you can't find someone you think is the best for the job and are instead trying to "value" hire just put Sven in charge for 10K and call it a day.
Its all random anyways, might as well hire NAIA coaches for the next hundred years for cheap because it will save money!
And tough fucking shit, because it's all moot. We don't have a fully guaranteed $100m to throw at a coach. We do in fact have much smaller dicks than USC and LSU, and if that's a surprise to you then you're a fucking idiot. The amount of dipshits here who appear to be shocked at the revelation that we stopped caring about football in the 90s is astounding. This isn't news. Look around. This is what we have and it's only going to get worse as the CFB parity gulf continues to widen. So either start a multi-billion dollar empire and give UW a slush fund to stay ahead in this sport, or just shut the fuck up already.
You cant expect, need some perspective, THIS economy, they have a contract.
DIAFF doog.
We're not big time, and haven't been for decades. Sorry you had to hear it from me. If you can't cope with it you can always kill yourself.
Lather rinse repeat
The fans eat this shit up every time and make the excuses for the program so the AD doesn't have to
10 years 100 million dollars gets a coach.
If you want to go cheap the MAC is the cradle of coaches. The Mountain West is where coaches go to die.
I see you're still grappling with the bargaining phase. Tough place to be.
