I know Kim used this word to describe Mora which couldn't be further from the truth but Sark is going to implode down in USC.
They won't put up with his bullshit down there. I was actually surprised Sark left to USC myself. Once he fails at USC I doubt he ever has another head coaching gig again.
It was a very small moment but I thought Justin Wilcox yelling "9 wins" on his way out the door was very telling. These guys actually think they did a great job at Washington. From 0-12 to 9 wins brah. Sark and his boys actually believe the bullshit they're selling. In that context it's not at all surprising that Sark took the job.
I know Kim used this word to describe Mora which couldn't be further from the truth but Sark is going to implode down in USC.
They won't put up with his bullshit down there. I was actually surprised Sark left to USC myself. Once he fails at USC I doubt he ever has another head coaching gig again.
It was a very small moment but I thought Justin Wilcox yelling "9 wins" on his way out the door was very telling. These guys actually think they did a great job at Washington. From 0-12 to 9 wins brah. Sark and his boys actually believe the bullshit they're selling. In that context it's not at all surprising that Sark took the job.
Damn I expect that nonsense from Sark but I figured Wilcox was above that garbage. I gotta say I was disappointed in Wilcox choosing to go with Sark.
You are right that Sark thinks his tenure at Washington was a success. He's had so many up here in the media who have blown him the last few years telling him how great he is that I think he actually believes he inherited a true 0-12 program.
I know Kim used this word to describe Mora which couldn't be further from the truth but Sark is going to implode down in USC.
They won't put up with his bullshit down there. I was actually surprised Sark left to USC myself. Once he fails at USC I doubt he ever has another head coaching gig again.
Sark has one of the best agents in the business. I have no idea who in the hell he is but he helped get him the job at SC and had his name in NFL coaching searches and even Arkansas at one point (No way Sark takes a job where they fire you for lying about your affairs with co-eds).
After SC he will land a coordinator job or lower level D1 school.
Kiffin's agent killed it too. My theory is they got into the right LA social circles because of their affiliations to USC's dominance. There were tons of celebrities around and no NFL team. The Hollywood types saw dollar signs and they have all laughed all the way to the bank despite Sark and Kiffin being bad coaches. The wonderboy reputations and great agents have been a lethal combination.
I wouldn't be one bit surprised if Sark gets another BCS job after he gets fired at USC. Some shitty program will pay him 2+ million because he has "proven" he can turn a program around. After all, UW was 0-12 when he was hired!
Sark has as good or better players at SC at every position other than TE and QB. Even if SC doesn't live up to these numbers, the offense will be much better than last season. Sark has the benefit of the experience of implementing this system last year at UW in order to adjust accordingly at SC. I saw UW's spring game last year and it wasn't much better than SC's yesterday.
Let's see what happens in fall camp. If we still see some of these issues at that time, then there's reason for concern.
Sark is a good coach and knows what he's doing. With all the great offenses around the country in today's game, you can't achieve the numbers listed above by accident.
Sark's success at $C over the next 3 years will invalidate the beliefs here that he was a bad coach...
Sark has as good or better players at SC at every position other than TE and QB. Even if SC doesn't live up to these numbers, the offense will be much better than last season. Sark has the benefit of the experience of implementing this system last year at UW in order to adjust accordingly at SC. I saw UW's spring game last year and it wasn't much better than SC's yesterday.
Let's see what happens in fall camp. If we still see some of these issues at that time, then there's reason for concern.
Sark is a good coach and knows what he's doing. With all the great offenses around the country in today's game, you can't achieve the numbers listed above by accident.
Sark's success at $C over the next 3 years will invalidate the beliefs here that he was a bad coach...
I don't know if this post is a whoosh or not, but the bold isn't true. UW had better WR's and a better RB too. USC also lost 4 OL from last year's team. They already have a true freshman starting at guard. It's not that talented of an offense. UW's offense was good last year, but froze up and under achieved against the good teams. The offense was very average and even sucked in the 4 years before that. He's not a good OC, let alone a good head coach.
Sark has as good or better players at SC at every position other than TE and QB. Even if SC doesn't live up to these numbers, the offense will be much better than last season. Sark has the benefit of the experience of implementing this system last year at UW in order to adjust accordingly at SC. I saw UW's spring game last year and it wasn't much better than SC's yesterday.
Let's see what happens in fall camp. If we still see some of these issues at that time, then there's reason for concern. Sark is a good coach and knows what he's doing. With all the great offenses around the country in today's game, you can't achieve the numbers listed above by accident.
Sark's success at $C over the next 3 years will invalidate the beliefs here that he was a bad coach...
Hope this is a whoosh. Otherwise you just ruined a great handle.
Sark has as good or better players at SC at every position other than TE and QB. Even if SC doesn't live up to these numbers, the offense will be much better than last season. Sark has the benefit of the experience of implementing this system last year at UW in order to adjust accordingly at SC. I saw UW's spring game last year and it wasn't much better than SC's yesterday.
Let's see what happens in fall camp. If we still see some of these issues at that time, then there's reason for concern.
Sark is a good coach and knows what he's doing. With all the great offenses around the country in today's game, you can't achieve the numbers listed above by accident.
Sark's success at $C over the next 3 years will invalidate the beliefs here that he was a bad coach...
Can you quote this "Great" coach and his offensive numbers from 2009, 2010, and 2012? Sark had two good years of offense, one average(2009) and two shit years(2010 and 2012).
Sark was all over the place offensively and against the good teams his teams didn't do jack shit.
I'm going to take some heat for saying this, but Sark is not a bad coach.
He is lazy, immature, and overrated as a play caller.
What we overlook is at the age of 34 he took over one of the top football programs in the country (revenue, size, conference, etc) and didn't run it into the ground.
0-12 was not 0-12 ... it was still a bad culture and could have easily been in the shits for years.
If the guy had discipline, maybe paid his dues a little more and been focused, he likely would have been above average.
At SC I fully expect him to win 9-10-11 games a year. The equivalent to average at Washington. Just enough to make the naive believe in him ... piss off those who know better ... and not justify a buy out by firing.
He will never out coach a good coach, he'll never out hustle a worker coach, and he'll beat average coaches and beat the shit out of bad coaches.
As the famous Race Bannon says ... you are what your record says you are ... and it fully applies to Sark.
A below average coach who feasts on weak competition and has a great agent and a charming smile.
I'd be curious how Sark's 2013 UW stats would look if he had to play Notre Dame on the road, Boston College (7-6), and Utah State (MWC division champ) instead of Boise St (did not win their MWC division), Illinois (4-8) and Idaho St.
I know Kim used this word to describe Mora which couldn't be further from the truth but Sark is going to implode down in USC.
They won't put up with his bullshit down there. I was actually surprised Sark left to USC myself. Once he fails at USC I doubt he ever has another head coaching gig again.
Sark has one of the best agents in the business. I have no idea who in the hell he is but he helped get him the job at SC and had his name in NFL coaching searches and even Arkansas at one point (No way Sark takes a job where they fire you for lying about your affairs with co-eds).
After SC he will land a coordinator job or lower level D1 school.
Kiffin's agent killed it too. My theory is they got into the right LA social circles because of their affiliations to USC's dominance. There were tons of celebrities around and no NFL team. The Hollywood types saw dollar signs and they have all laughed all the way to the bank despite Sark and Kiffin being bad coaches. The wonderboy reputations and great agents have been a lethal combination.
I wouldn't be one bit surprised if Sark gets another BCS job after he gets fired at USC. Some shitty program will pay him 2+ million because he has "proven" he can turn a program around. After all, UW was 0-12 when he was hired!
His next move will be to the NFL.
There he will get generational money and fade into bolivian.
I'm going to take some heat for saying this, but Sark is not a bad coach.
He is lazy, immature, and overrated as a play caller.
What we overlook is at the age of 34 he took over one of the top football programs in the country (revenue, size, conference, etc) and didn't run it into the ground.
0-12 was not 0-12 ... it was still a bad culture and could have easily been in the shits for years.
If the guy had discipline, maybe paid his dues a little more and been focused, he likely would have been above average.
At SC I fully expect him to win 9-10-11 games a year. The equivalent to average at Washington. Just enough to make the naive believe in him ... piss off those who know better ... and not justify a buy out by firing.
He will never out coach a good coach, he'll never out hustle a worker coach, and he'll beat average coaches and beat the shit out of bad coaches.
As the famous Race Bannon says ... you are what your record says you are ... and it fully applies to Sark.
A below average coach who feasts on weak competition and has a great agent and a charming smile.
I like to be topdawgncfs and say a coach isn't a bad coach while also saying he's a below average coach in the same poast, TWILTD.
Have fun driving down 60 yards only to end up taking a field goal. Or even better missing the 30 yard field goal because SarkFS only recruits WR/RB/QBs. Those numbers are so inflated it isn't even funny.
If this genius went and actually looked at the schedule from last year he would realize Sark inflates his offensive stats by plungering D1-AA teams and shitty Pac-12 ones like Oregon State.
I can't wait until USC is getting plungered by UCLA despite having 400 yards of offense in the 4th quarter and this Mannyb133 fuck comes to the realization those numbers were indeed lying.
Don't forget about needing to gain more yards due to consistently terrible field position. But I guess that's what happens when your fucktarded special teams coach is mostly just a drinking buddy.
1) Sark milked 0-12 for all that he could - which pulled the wool over the eyes of doogs and rolled the eyes of those that actually understanding baselines and normalizing of results
2) Sark's youthful energy combined with results at USC allowed for an instant buy-in of a program (both players and fan base) that needed something to believe in
3) After a plunger raping in the Alamo Bowl during Year 3, Sark fired his defensive staff (deservedly so) to shift heat off of him for the next year or two (dishonorable mention for the rumors of the pussy ass way that he fired said defensive staff)
4) By the end of Year 4, Sark had established an ability to beat those who he should beat and lose to those he should lose to ... Year 5 was going to be very telling about his ability
5) By the middle of Year 5, it was clear to any Husky supporter with half of a brain that Sark was what we thought he was at the end of Year 4. While the upgrades to his defensive staff generally showed on the field, the overall results remained unchanged leading to a pointing of the finger to the constants of the program - which start at the top. The ire became increasing after Sark kept patting himself on the back after a good start and fell into the normal Sark mid-season rut once he had to play the big boys.
6) Sark showed a general inability to recruit in-state and his relationships with the major HS programs/coaches in the state was generally frosty. It's not a stretch to say that they viewed Sark as a fake and all about himself.
7) Sark's off the field behavior that included banging cocktail waitresses at Joey's combined with thinking that it was good form to show up to High School All-Star events with a drunk party bus was not only severely lacking, but also becoming more and more of an issue given that the results weren't there.
8) Respected members of Sark's offensive staff gradually left Sark to find greener pastures in Nuss going to Alabama and Joel Thomas going to Arkansas. Many shrugged those off as SEC SEC SEC moves ... but I'm beginning to think it had as much to do with not wanting to attach yourself to the sinking SS Sarkisian. Consider the coaches that they attached their ship to upon leaving and the success that those coaches have had. To plug holes Sark moved a constant on his staff, Johnny Nansen to cover. Nansen's only expertise to Sark is suggesting what tequila to drink for the night.
9) Almost 6 months after the fact, there hasn't been a single ounce of evidence that suggests that Woodward worked that hard at retaining Sark when SC came calling. In fact, the most telling words from Woodward on the issue were to the team the afternoon that Sark left (which he also handled quite poorly to the point that his players told him to Fuck Off - which also appears to be a recurring theme of former players) saying that his goal was to find them a championship caliber head coach.
10) Without even coaching a game at USC, Sarkisian is already drawing the ire of many USC supporters (who for as much as they are a rival, I respect them from the standpoint that they have expectations and know what good football looks like) because they are seeing the lack of attention to detail, general sloppiness, and mirages to the program that Sark produced at Washington. Sark says that he's focused on fundamentals but his actions are all tied to gimmicks. That gets sniffed out quickly at a school that is perfectly content running Student Body Left and Student Body Right play after play after play after play.
Comments
You are right that Sark thinks his tenure at Washington was a success. He's had so many up here in the media who have blown him the last few years telling him how great he is that I think he actually believes he inherited a true 0-12 program.
I wouldn't be one bit surprised if Sark gets another BCS job after he gets fired at USC. Some shitty program will pay him 2+ million because he has "proven" he can turn a program around. After all, UW was 0-12 when he was hired!
2013 Washington offense:
Total Offense: 499.3 yds/game, 13th nationally (SC: 399.9 yds/game, 72nd nationally)
Rushing Offense: 239.0 yds/game, 15th nationally (SC: 172.8 yds/game 59th nationally)
Scoring Offense: 37.9 pts/game, 18th nationally (SC: 29.7 pts/game, 60th nationally)
Third Down Conv. %: 49.0% overall, 11th nationally (SC: 35.1% overall, 97th nationally)
Red Zone Score TD%: 85.2% overall (SC: 73.0% overall)
The numbers don't lie.
Sark has as good or better players at SC at every position other than TE and QB. Even if SC doesn't live up to these numbers, the offense will be much better than last season. Sark has the benefit of the experience of implementing this system last year at UW in order to adjust accordingly at SC. I saw UW's spring game last year and it wasn't much better than SC's yesterday.
Let's see what happens in fall camp. If we still see some of these issues at that time, then there's reason for concern.
Sark is a good coach and knows what he's doing. With all the great offenses around the country in today's game, you can't achieve the numbers listed above by accident.
Sark's success at $C over the next 3 years will invalidate the beliefs here that he was a bad coach...
Sark was all over the place offensively and against the good teams his teams didn't do jack shit.
He is lazy, immature, and overrated as a play caller.
What we overlook is at the age of 34 he took over one of the top football programs in the country (revenue, size, conference, etc) and didn't run it into the ground.
0-12 was not 0-12 ... it was still a bad culture and could have easily been in the shits for years.
If the guy had discipline, maybe paid his dues a little more and been focused, he likely would have been above average.
At SC I fully expect him to win 9-10-11 games a year. The equivalent to average at Washington. Just enough to make the naive believe in him ... piss off those who know better ... and not justify a buy out by firing.
He will never out coach a good coach, he'll never out hustle a worker coach, and he'll beat average coaches and beat the shit out of bad coaches.
As the famous Race Bannon says ... you are what your record says you are ... and it fully applies to Sark.
A below average coach who feasts on weak competition and has a great agent and a charming smile.
There he will get generational money and fade into bolivian.
Below average = bad.
hth
Total Offense: 499.3 yds/game, 13th nationally (SC: 399.9 yds/game, 72nd nationally)
Rushing Offense: 239.0 yds/game, 15th nationally (SC: 172.8 yds/game 59th nationally)
Scoring Offense: 37.9 pts/game, 18th nationally (SC: 29.7 pts/game, 60th nationally)
Third Down Conv. %: 49.0% overall, 11th nationally (SC: 35.1% overall, 97th nationally)
Red Zone Score TD%: 85.2% overall (SC: 73.0% overall)
The numbers don't lie. "
CHRIST!
Have fun driving down 60 yards only to end up taking a field goal. Or even better missing the 30 yard field goal because SarkFS only recruits WR/RB/QBs. Those numbers are so inflated it isn't even funny.
If this genius went and actually looked at the schedule from last year he would realize Sark inflates his offensive stats by plungering D1-AA teams and shitty Pac-12 ones like Oregon State.
I can't wait until USC is getting plungered by UCLA despite having 400 yards of offense in the 4th quarter and this Mannyb133 fuck comes to the realization those numbers were indeed lying.
1) Sark milked 0-12 for all that he could - which pulled the wool over the eyes of doogs and rolled the eyes of those that actually understanding baselines and normalizing of results
2) Sark's youthful energy combined with results at USC allowed for an instant buy-in of a program (both players and fan base) that needed something to believe in
3) After a plunger raping in the Alamo Bowl during Year 3, Sark fired his defensive staff (deservedly so) to shift heat off of him for the next year or two (dishonorable mention for the rumors of the pussy ass way that he fired said defensive staff)
4) By the end of Year 4, Sark had established an ability to beat those who he should beat and lose to those he should lose to ... Year 5 was going to be very telling about his ability
5) By the middle of Year 5, it was clear to any Husky supporter with half of a brain that Sark was what we thought he was at the end of Year 4. While the upgrades to his defensive staff generally showed on the field, the overall results remained unchanged leading to a pointing of the finger to the constants of the program - which start at the top. The ire became increasing after Sark kept patting himself on the back after a good start and fell into the normal Sark mid-season rut once he had to play the big boys.
6) Sark showed a general inability to recruit in-state and his relationships with the major HS programs/coaches in the state was generally frosty. It's not a stretch to say that they viewed Sark as a fake and all about himself.
7) Sark's off the field behavior that included banging cocktail waitresses at Joey's combined with thinking that it was good form to show up to High School All-Star events with a drunk party bus was not only severely lacking, but also becoming more and more of an issue given that the results weren't there.
8) Respected members of Sark's offensive staff gradually left Sark to find greener pastures in Nuss going to Alabama and Joel Thomas going to Arkansas. Many shrugged those off as SEC SEC SEC moves ... but I'm beginning to think it had as much to do with not wanting to attach yourself to the sinking SS Sarkisian. Consider the coaches that they attached their ship to upon leaving and the success that those coaches have had. To plug holes Sark moved a constant on his staff, Johnny Nansen to cover. Nansen's only expertise to Sark is suggesting what tequila to drink for the night.
9) Almost 6 months after the fact, there hasn't been a single ounce of evidence that suggests that Woodward worked that hard at retaining Sark when SC came calling. In fact, the most telling words from Woodward on the issue were to the team the afternoon that Sark left (which he also handled quite poorly to the point that his players told him to Fuck Off - which also appears to be a recurring theme of former players) saying that his goal was to find them a championship caliber head coach.
10) Without even coaching a game at USC, Sarkisian is already drawing the ire of many USC supporters (who for as much as they are a rival, I respect them from the standpoint that they have expectations and know what good football looks like) because they are seeing the lack of attention to detail, general sloppiness, and mirages to the program that Sark produced at Washington. Sark says that he's focused on fundamentals but his actions are all tied to gimmicks. That gets sniffed out quickly at a school that is perfectly content running Student Body Left and Student Body Right play after play after play after play.