They also lost their top 2 running backs, and 4 starters on the OL (I know they have recruited like crazy on the OL, but that is still a significant number, and it might effect the quality of their jumbo packages).
Josh Mauro is also gone on the DL so that is 4 of their front 7. Yes they will still be talented up front, but still big losses. Ed Reynolds left early for the NFL too, he was a playmaker for them in the secondary.
I don't think it will be an easy win at all, but it sure helps to play them early, and play them at home. Especially considering we should be 4-0 heading into that game.
I think CFBMatrix has us going 8-5 this year. I am not 100% sure on that, but he notes that it is hard to predict with new coaches coming in.
If he does predict 8 wins and we end up winning 10 lets say, that would mean Pete in his first season is a +2 coach effect. I can't see any way we only win 8 games.
Oregon is the only sure loss. UCLA and Stanford will be tough, but they are at home. At Arizona and at WSU will be tough games. I guarantee we win at least 9. 10 or 11 is probably most likely. The schedule is set up well with the home/road match ups.
I would like to think IF we have a quality coach now that "guranteed loss" isn't in the vocabulary.
This.
I dooged it up a bit in the early portion of the season last year with the LIPO mantra regarding Sark. Looking back, the Sark script was rather easy to see; I should have bet a lot of money against Sark every fucking road game. I'd be living in a beach house outside of Kona, snorting blow off a supermodel's ass.
I only missed one game all year along with DNC which was the Oregon State game. Although the fire Sark talk was heating up so I had a feeling UW would win. It feels like whenever the fire Sark talk got momentum that fuck stick would pull out a win.
Why is everyone so quick to mark a W for the Stanford game? Because they lost Skov, Gardner, and Murphy? That's still going to be a tough game.
Probably cause UW defeated them two years ago and should have defeated them last year with Dude Brah as coach.
I think that will be the first big test in Petersen's career. However, at home I think that's a game you gotta win.
Stanford I read also returns the fewest starters in the conference while UCLA returns the most.
I got ripped in the Leach thread for saying Stanford is going to take a step backwards next year, but they really are. Hogan can't put the team on his back; he is a "game manager" that isn't very clutch. I've never seen Hogan take over a game, but he's never had to, because Stanford has been much greater than the sum of its parts for a while now.
However, having to replace a bunch of starters, coupled with a difficult schedule (@UW, @UO, @UCLA), means that Furd is gonna struggle next year.
Why is everyone so quick to mark a W for the Stanford game? Because they lost Skov, Gardner, and Murphy? That's still going to be a tough game.
Probably cause UW defeated them two years ago and should have defeated them last year with Dude Brah as coach.
I think that will be the first big test in Petersen's career. However, at home I think that's a game you gotta win.
Stanford I read also returns the fewest starters in the conference while UCLA returns the most.
I got ripped in the Leach thread for saying Stanford is going to take a step backwards next year, but they really are. Hogan can't put the team on his back; he is a "game manager" that isn't very clutch. I've never seen Hogan take over a game, but he's never had to, because Stanford has been much greater than the sum of its parts for a while now.
However, having to replace a bunch of starters, coupled with a difficult schedule (@UW, @UO, @UCLA), means that Furd is gonna struggle next year.
No you didn't. We all agreed Stanford was going to take a step backwards. Where you got ripped was saying WSU was going to pass Stanford.
I think CFBMatrix has us going 8-5 this year. I am not 100% sure on that, but he notes that it is hard to predict with new coaches coming in.
If he does predict 8 wins and we end up winning 10 lets say, that would mean Pete in his first season is a +2 coach effect. I can't see any way we only win 8 games.
I saw Dave Barto who runs that site tweet he is probably going to put UW at 10 wins. I think the 8-5 might have been from last year.
He nailed last year btw. He said last year has 10 win talent but Sark is a minus one win coach so he put 9-3. Actually he even underestimated Sark as he went 8-4.
I always tell this to Doogs how Sark was the only coach in America to be a negative win coach in five straight seasons. They always respond "Well he's a Duck fan so he's obviously bias against us". I'm like him being a Duck fan has nothing to do it with, it's pure math analysis.
Why is everyone so quick to mark a W for the Stanford game? Because they lost Skov, Gardner, and Murphy? That's still going to be a tough game.
Probably cause UW defeated them two years ago and should have defeated them last year with Dude Brah as coach.
I think that will be the first big test in Petersen's career. However, at home I think that's a game you gotta win.
Stanford I read also returns the fewest starters in the conference while UCLA returns the most.
I got ripped in the Leach thread for saying Stanford is going to take a step backwards next year, but they really are. Hogan can't put the team on his back; he is a "game manager" that isn't very clutch. I've never seen Hogan take over a game, but he's never had to, because Stanford has been much greater than the sum of its parts for a while now.
However, having to replace a bunch of starters, coupled with a difficult schedule (@UW, @UO, @UCLA), means that Furd is gonna struggle next year.
No you didn't. We all agreed Stanford was going to take a step backwards. Where you got ripped was saying WSU was going to pass Stanford.
You might want to learn the difference.
i think roaddoog brought up the (valid) point that people have been saying the same shit about stanford regressing for years. while that's true, I think their schedule is too difficult for them to finish higher than 3rd in the ridiculously strong north next year.
Yeah, I've been following Dave for a couple years now. Really like his formula and usually seems to be really accurate. I said the 8 wins because he recently posted a new coaches coach effect thing. But if he said 10 in a tweet then maybe that is what it will be. I know they are doing a magazine this year, should be cool.
I think CFBMatrix has us going 8-5 this year. I am not 100% sure on that, but he notes that it is hard to predict with new coaches coming in.
If he does predict 8 wins and we end up winning 10 lets say, that would mean Pete in his first season is a +2 coach effect. I can't see any way we only win 8 games.
I saw Dave Barto who runs that site tweet he is probably going to put UW at 10 wins. I think the 8-5 might have been from last year.
He nailed last year btw. He said last year has 10 win talent but Sark is a minus one win coach so he put 9-3. Actually he even underestimated Sark as he went 8-4.
I always tell this to Doogs how Sark was the only coach in America to be a negative win coach in five straight seasons. They always respond "Well he's a Duck fan so he's obviously bias against us". I'm like him being a Duck fan has nothing to do it with, it's pure math analysis.
@ Hawai'i: Craves it Eastern Washington: Craves it Illinois: Yes Georgia State: Craves it Stanford: Yes BYE @ California: Craves it @ Oregon: No Arizona State: Yes @ Colorado: Craves it UCLA: Yes @ Arizona: No Oregon State: Yes @ Washington State: Craves it
Gonna be a lot of unhappiness around here in November.
Yeah....unhappiness that we didn't beat OSU by fucking 69 again...just rather easily, say 44-17?
Please don't mistake me for a Boov. I've watched a ton of Pac 8/10/12 football and I think people predicting 10+ wins for the Huskies are going to be unhappy.
Why is everyone so quick to mark a W for the Stanford game? Because they lost Skov, Gardner, and Murphy? That's still going to be a tough game.
Probably cause UW defeated them two years ago and should have defeated them last year with Dude Brah as coach.
I think that will be the first big test in Petersen's career. However, at home I think that's a game you gotta win.
Stanford I read also returns the fewest starters in the conference while UCLA returns the most.
I got ripped in the Leach thread for saying Stanford is going to take a step backwards next year, but they really are. Hogan can't put the team on his back; he is a "game manager" that isn't very clutch. I've never seen Hogan take over a game, but he's never had to, because Stanford has been much greater than the sum of its parts for a while now.
However, having to replace a bunch of starters, coupled with a difficult schedule (@UW, @UO, @UCLA), means that Furd is gonna struggle next year.
No you didn't. We all agreed Stanford was going to take a step backwards. Where you got ripped was saying WSU was going to pass Stanford.
You might want to learn the difference.
i think roaddoog brought up the (valid) point that people have been saying the same shit about stanford regressing for years. while that's true, I think their schedule is too difficult for them to finish higher than 3rd in the ridiculously strong north next year.
No it was me who said we've been saying this for years. Some of you need to learn the difference.
I think Stanford falls to the middle of the pack but they won't go back to the Walt Harris Stanford days either.
Gonna be a lot of unhappiness around here in November.
Yeah....unhappiness that we didn't beat OSU by fucking 69 again...just rather easily, say 44-17?
Please don't mistake me for a Boov. I've watched a ton of Pac 8/10/12 football and I think people predicting 10+ wins for the Huskies are going to be unhappy.
This has nothing to do with Oregon State.
UW has four automatic OOC wins on the schedule. Going 6-3 in the conference isn't a stretch with a coaching upgrade from 5-4, 5-4, 5-4, 5-4.
@ Hawai'i: Craves it Eastern Washington: Craves it Illinois: Yes Georgia State: Craves it Stanford: Yes BYE @ California: Craves it @ Oregon: No Arizona State: Yes @ Colorado: Craves it UCLA: Yes @ Arizona: No Oregon State: Yes @ Washington State: Craves it
Gonna be a lot of unhappiness around here in November.
Yeah....unhappiness that we didn't beat OSU by fucking 69 again...just rather easily, say 44-17?
Please don't mistake me for a Boov. I've watched a ton of Pac 8/10/12 football and I think people predicting 10+ wins for the Huskies are going to be unhappy.
This has nothing to do with Oregon State.
You've definitely been boovin' it for Riley.
It's about time for people to predict 10 wins and have high standards for the program. That said, 7-6 would be ironically funny, but still fucking suck.
If 7-6 occurs, this message board will be ever more "over capacity" than it currently is
Comments
I think that will be the first big test in Petersen's career. However, at home I think that's a game you gotta win.
Stanford I read also returns the fewest starters in the conference while UCLA returns the most.
If he does predict 8 wins and we end up winning 10 lets say, that would mean Pete in his first season is a +2 coach effect. I can't see any way we only win 8 games.
However, having to replace a bunch of starters, coupled with a difficult schedule (@UW, @UO, @UCLA), means that Furd is gonna struggle next year.
You might want to learn the difference.
He nailed last year btw. He said last year has 10 win talent but Sark is a minus one win coach so he put 9-3. Actually he even underestimated Sark as he went 8-4.
I always tell this to Doogs how Sark was the only coach in America to be a negative win coach in five straight seasons. They always respond "Well he's a Duck fan so he's obviously bias against us". I'm like him being a Duck fan has nothing to do it with, it's pure math analysis.
-Ken Griswold
Holiday or Alamo
This has nothing to do with Oregon State.
I think Stanford falls to the middle of the pack but they won't go back to the Walt Harris Stanford days either.
It's about time for people to predict 10 wins and have high standards for the program. That said, 7-6 would be ironically funny, but still fucking suck.
If 7-6 occurs, this message board will be ever more "over capacity" than it currently is