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

Bob Rondeau Doog

2

Comments

  • [Deleted User]
    [Deleted User] Posts: 11,453
    PostGameOrangeSlices said:

    HeretoBeatmyChest said:

    had a top 15 advanced metrics finish

    Those "advanced metrics" are bullshit. The only thing UW was top 15 in was penalties
    Any time you can be a hypothetical top 15 team in year five then that's special.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Fire_Marshall_Bill
    Fire_Marshall_Bill Member Posts: 26,150 Standard Supporter
    edited April 2014
    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 ;) ).
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • HeretoBeatmyChest
    HeretoBeatmyChest Member Posts: 4,295
    PostGameOrangeSlices said:

    HeretoBeatmyChest said:

    had a top 15 advanced metrics finish

    Those "advanced metrics" are bullshit. The only thing UW was top 15 in was penalties
    The metrics more than anything else have the most predictive value for the next season. My friend did a big study on it.

    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.

    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Dawgfan406
    Dawgfan406 Member Posts: 192
    Some would take 9 wins as long as one was @ oregon and a bowl win to get to 10.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • fivehundredmileDAWG
    fivehundredmileDAWG Member Posts: 1,212
    We are done with that bullshit ...

    10 wins before the bowl or his ass gets hot ...

    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • PostGameOrangeSlices
    PostGameOrangeSlices Member Posts: 27,692
    HeretoBeatmyChest said:

    PostGameOrangeSlices said:

    HeretoBeatmyChest said:

    had a top 15 advanced metrics finish

    Those "advanced metrics" are bullshit. The only thing UW was top 15 in was penalties
    I'll give you a pass but the metrics are not bullshit. Wise up before making another comment like that again.

    Uhhh


    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
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • haie
    haie Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 24,495 Founders Club
    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.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • PostGameOrangeSlices
    PostGameOrangeSlices Member Posts: 27,692
    edited April 2014
    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 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.

    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
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • haie
    haie Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 24,495 Founders Club
    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.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Dardanus
    Dardanus Member Posts: 2,623
    The only way I'd be happy with 9-4 is if we went 9-0 in the conference.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter