Bob Rondeau Doog
Another 5-4 fucking year in conference ...
Do these FS dumbfucks that think 9 wins this year means 5 conference wins?
Comments
-
He's a paid employee. I don't expect him to have standards.
-
This ^^
-
I wonder what Damon would think. Paid employees are all predictable.
-
Enough with the KJR talk, professor doogie.
Can we get a fucking KJR talk bored? -
Given that this team went 9-4 last year, had a top 15 advanced metrics finish, returns 17/22 starters and has a better coach and easier schedule, its fucktarded to say you'd take 9 wins. Even if it comes from a UW employee.
In 2012 Rondeau did say he would take 6 wins. That team with Petersen goes 9-4 even with losing 4 OL. Rondeau sets the bar way too low. -
Those "advanced metrics" are bullshit. The only thing UW was top 15 in was penaltiesHeretoBeatmyChest said:had a top 15 advanced metrics finish
-
Dave Softy Mahler@Softykjr·
Rondeau says he would take 9 wins for UW right now. Agree?
some real doog responses
Andy Sommerville@AndySomm503·10h
@Softykjr PAC 12 will be as tough as ever. 8 wins would still be a good season.
andy harkleroad@HarkleHawk·10h
@Softykjr NO 9 would be disappointing, unless one of those 9 is Oregon (nothing else matters)
Dugan@DavePdxdawg·10h
@Softykjr Yes. Good way to start off the Peterson Era...
Nick Smith@UWNICKY·10h
@Softykjr New QB, new coach. Anymore than 9 would be unreal -
"Andy Harkleroad?"
Auce -
hey, I know 2 Andy Sommervilles.
-
Why does Softy hate Peterman? Why does he hold Peterman to a higher standard than he did his buddy Sark? Softy was dancing' in the streets when Sark won 5 games with half the roster filled with future NFL'ers. Why the new standard?
-
Any time you can be a hypothetical top 15 team in year five then that's special.PostGameOrangeSlices said:
Those "advanced metrics" are bullshit. The only thing UW was top 15 in was penaltiesHeretoBeatmyChest said:had a top 15 advanced metrics finish
-
Rondeau is an excellent play-by-play guy. I can extend him some slack. I'd probably take 10 (regular season) wins, so it's not an outrageous comment.
Plus he has some class and isn't a fat slob loudmouth mouthbreather Doog like Softy, or some amazon Affirmative Action Doog like Elise (I'd still tear it up -queer Kim wink
). -
The metrics more than anything else have the most predictive value for the next season. My friend did a big study on it.PostGameOrangeSlices said:
Those "advanced metrics" are bullshit. The only thing UW was top 15 in was penaltiesHeretoBeatmyChest said:had a top 15 advanced metrics finish
Wins and championships are what matter most but the metrics are another way to show how good teams really are because they adjust for schedule difficulty and margin of victory.
BTW, SRS (sports-reference) metrics has UW's 1991 team as the 2nd best college football team of all time, just slightly behind Nebraska 1995.
I'll give you a pass but the metrics are not bullshit. Wise up before making another comment like that again.
-
Some would take 9 wins as long as one was @ oregon and a bowl win to get to 10.
-
We are done with that bullshit ...
10 wins before the bowl or his ass gets hot ...
-
UhhhHeretoBeatmyChest said:
I'll give you a pass but the metrics are not bullshit. Wise up before making another comment like that again.PostGameOrangeSlices said:
Those "advanced metrics" are bullshit. The only thing UW was top 15 in was penaltiesHeretoBeatmyChest said:had a top 15 advanced metrics finish
The metrics are fucking bullshit. They fail to account for Sark's complete coaching ineptitude in big games. UW would never finish in the top 15 under Sark; under no hypothetical metric bullshit scenario does Sark lead UW to the top 15 -
The metrics are there to show that based on talent and a number of other factors not related to the coach, how good a team is. The fact that we are top 15 in metrics but only top 25 in reality points exactly to how mediocre of a coach Sark is. It's an alternative to looking at a team getting a top recruiting class but then still being shit when that class steps on the field. Ultimately it points to what we have all been saying: UW is a program with all the tools to succeed on a national level in college football but hasn't because shitheads have been running it.
-
The whole team was full of chokers and it started with the head coach. The metrics can't account for that. I also don't buy the top-15 talent argument. UW isn't in the top 2/3 of the fucking SEC as far as talent. UW is probably around #25 in talent, right where they are ranked.haie said:The metrics are there to show that based on talent and a number of other factors not related to the coach, how good a team is. The fact that we are top 15 in metrics but only top 25 in reality points exactly to how mediocre of a coach Sark is. It's an alternative to looking at a team getting a top recruiting class but then still being shit when that class steps on the field. Ultimately it points to what we have all been saying: UW is a program with all the tools to succeed on a national level in college football but hasn't because shitheads have been running it.
The metrics don't actually see the games and watch UW get boatraced in the ways that they do.
also, the Pac-12 sucked.
UW was what they were ranked, a borderline top-25 team with borderline top-25 talent...and top-15 in penalties
-
Yes if you take into account all the factors we have been bitching about UW is rightfully a top 25 team. But that's why metrics are a good tool, it gives you an idea of the team without those factors. Just because the SEC is the best conference in the country doesn't mean that our personnel had no business being top 15. It's just that we had no business being top 15 because of the culture of the team and Dude Bra.
-
The only way I'd be happy with 9-4 is if we went 9-0 in the conference.
-
It's so incredible how she still has a job. Only in fucking Seattle the PC capitol of the world can this happen.Fire_Marshall_Bill said:Rondeau is an excellent play-by-play guy. I can extend him some slack. I'd probably take 10 (regular season) wins, so it's not an outrageous comment.
Plus he has some class and isn't a fat slob loudmouth mouthbreather Doog like Softy, or some amazon Affirmative Action Doog like Elise (I'd still tear it up -queer Kim wink ).
They tried her out and she bombed at night, so they put her on primetime with Gas and she bombed and now she is on Softy's old time slot and is fucking horrible too.
I remember when she was moved to primetime Furness tweeted that he's glad that Elise finally gets her shot to prove how good she really is. What a crock.
Her opinions are so fucking horrible and she lacks intelligence. She's also not even that hot, sure I'd hit it but if you saw her at a club she wouldn't even register to you. -
If Petermen loses one of the four OOC dreckfest games let alone all four I will want his fucking ass fired on the 50 yard line.Dardanus said:The only way I'd be happy with 9-4 is if we went 9-0 in the conference.
-
Sure, but that's not the point.He_Needs_More_Time said:
If Petermen loses one of the four OOC dreckfest games let alone all four I will want his fucking ass fired on the 50 yard line.Dardanus said:The only way I'd be happy with 9-4 is if we went 9-0 in the conference.
-
I barely heard her before she got her slot w/ Brewer but no white fucking male would get that many chances. You know it, I know it, everyone knows it.He_Needs_More_Time said:
It's so incredible how she still has a job. Only in fucking Seattle the PC capitol of the world can this happen.Fire_Marshall_Bill said:Rondeau is an excellent play-by-play guy. I can extend him some slack. I'd probably take 10 (regular season) wins, so it's not an outrageous comment.
Plus he has some class and isn't a fat slob loudmouth mouthbreather Doog like Softy, or some amazon Affirmative Action Doog like Elise (I'd still tear it up -queer Kim wink ).
They tried her out and she bombed at night, so they put her on primetime with Gas and she bombed and now she is on Softy's old time slot and is fucking horrible too.
I remember when she was moved to primetime Furness tweeted that he's glad that Elise finally gets her shot to prove how good she really is. What a crock.
Her opinions are so fucking horrible and she lacks intelligence. She's also not even that hot, sure I'd hit it but if you saw her at a club she wouldn't even register to you.
That show actually isn't horrible if they actually talk sports, but Elise likes to be loud and bubbly in her tomboy/three glasses of wine from scissoring w/ her old lesbian teammate way and/or funny and Jerry likes to talk about fucking Beyonce so it gets off track easily.
I agree she's not real hot but for a MILF who's in her 30s, she beats all the fat Spanaway COTW types.
-
Wow, that's some major Competitive Doogingdhdawg said:
Dave Softy Mahler@Softykjr·
Rondeau says he would take 9 wins for UW right now. Agree?
some real doog responses
Andy Sommerville@AndySomm503·10h
@Softykjr PAC 12 will be as tough as ever. 8 wins would still be a good season.
andy harkleroad@HarkleHawk·10h
@Softykjr NO 9 would be disappointing, unless one of those 9 is Oregon (nothing else matters)
Dugan@DavePdxdawg·10h
@Softykjr Yes. Good way to start off the Peterson Era...
Nick Smith@UWNICKY·10h
@Softykjr New QB, new coach. Anymore than 9 would be unreal -
You are basically saying Sark did a fine job. Last years team had a lot of talent, right at the top of the conference IMO.PostGameOrangeSlices said:
The whole team was full of chokers and it started with the head coach. The metrics can't account for that. I also don't buy the top-15 talent argument. UW isn't in the top 2/3 of the fucking SEC as far as talent. UW is probably around #25 in talent, right where they are ranked.haie said:The metrics are there to show that based on talent and a number of other factors not related to the coach, how good a team is. The fact that we are top 15 in metrics but only top 25 in reality points exactly to how mediocre of a coach Sark is. It's an alternative to looking at a team getting a top recruiting class but then still being shit when that class steps on the field. Ultimately it points to what we have all been saying: UW is a program with all the tools to succeed on a national level in college football but hasn't because shitheads have been running it.
The metrics don't actually see the games and watch UW get boatraced in the ways that they do.
also, the Pac-12 sucked.
UW was what they were ranked, a borderline top-25 team with borderline top-25 talent...and top-15 in penalties -
Not what im saying at all. Im saying sark was a dipshit that couldn't coach on the road, and who fielded inconsistent teams full of above average skill players and below average linemanRoadDawg55 said:
You are basically saying Sark did a fine job. Last years team had a lot of talent, right at the top of the conference IMO.PostGameOrangeSlices said:
The whole team was full of chokers and it started with the head coach. The metrics can't account for that. I also don't buy the top-15 talent argument. UW isn't in the top 2/3 of the fucking SEC as far as talent. UW is probably around #25 in talent, right where they are ranked.haie said:The metrics are there to show that based on talent and a number of other factors not related to the coach, how good a team is. The fact that we are top 15 in metrics but only top 25 in reality points exactly to how mediocre of a coach Sark is. It's an alternative to looking at a team getting a top recruiting class but then still being shit when that class steps on the field. Ultimately it points to what we have all been saying: UW is a program with all the tools to succeed on a national level in college football but hasn't because shitheads have been running it.
The metrics don't actually see the games and watch UW get boatraced in the ways that they do.
also, the Pac-12 sucked.
UW was what they were ranked, a borderline top-25 team with borderline top-25 talent...and top-15 in penalties
![[Deleted User]](https://wb.vanillicon.com/b14605887e2b6b59902271a0095c9265_100.png)
