AANDY says Lambo should've read "Team of Rivals" to keep from being fired

topdawgnc

whatshouldicareabout said:

Anyway, the whole point of this thread is that both Lambo and Sark sucked.

Thank God we have Petersen now.

Who in the fuck is Petersen?

Does he poast here?

Is his football team stacked or paper thin?

[Deleted User]

MikeDamone said:

whatshouldicareabout said:

MikeDamone said:

whatshouldicareabout said:

RoadDawg55 said:

I can't decide between Sark and Lambo. They both sucked.

Lambo had a Pac-10 championship. Sark's best year was 5-4 in conference.

Lambo did less with more. That 1996 and 1997 team's that tied for a pac 10 title and lost the holiday bowl and Aloha bowls were he most talented team of the last 20 years. And Lambo stumbled into 7 and 9 wins.

It was the 95 Sun Bowl team that won the Pac-10. Now let's never talk about 95 again.

Also, the argument that Lambo did less with more is true, but you could say the same for Sark, especially when you consider a team that had Locker, Polk, Kearse, Ta'amu, DTN, Bulter, Foster, and Trufant had a losing record.

You're right,should have said 1995 and 1996.

And yes, the same can be said for Sark....that truth and the lack of a forum to express it, is the reason this place exists.

The 1997 team sent 13 guys to the NFL following year and had a 7-4 regular season. Were ranked #2 in the country and top 10 until November.

That was the most depressing season ever even more than 2008.

digits

dnc said:

whatshouldicareabout said:

RoadDawg55 said:

I can't decide between Sark and Lambo. They both sucked.

Lambo had a Pac-10 championship. Sark's best year was 5-4 in conference.

True. OTOH, while Sark didn't take over the owen12 debacle that doog folklore likes to say he did, he didn't take over a a program coming off of 3 straight Rose Bowels with clearly established dominance in the northwest and most of the west coast either. Lambo inherited a sweetheart opportunity and never did better than splitting a conference title in six years.

I put Lambo slightly ahead of Sark, but I see the argument. They have a ton in common, right down to the PLSS love.

Yes, Lambo inherited a stacked roster. However, I wouldn't classify taking over a team less than two weeks before the season opener, trying to fill the shoes of a legendary coach (who just resigned in large part to protest his own university's actions), including two years probation/bowl ban, scholarship reductions, and no tv revenue exactly a, "sweetheart opportunity."

The program was absolutely shook to the core when DJ resigned, make no qualms about it.

I recognize Lambo wasn't the best HC, but comparing him to Sark is over the line. Lambo dedicated 30+ years as a student, player and coach to UW, and he gets compared to that shitbag Sark, who was here for five? Did Sark ever beat 0regon_GFY? How about Ohio St? What about Miami? DIAFF.

I don't give a shit, dedicating your life to something, anything, for 30+ years deserves some fucking respect.

Go fuck yourselves.

[Deleted User]

Joe Stephanson said:

dnc said:

whatshouldicareabout said:

RoadDawg55 said:

I can't decide between Sark and Lambo. They both sucked.

Lambo had a Pac-10 championship. Sark's best year was 5-4 in conference.

True. OTOH, while Sark didn't take over the owen12 debacle that doog folklore likes to say he did, he didn't take over a a program coming off of 3 straight Rose Bowels with clearly established dominance in the northwest and most of the west coast either. Lambo inherited a sweetheart opportunity and never did better than splitting a conference title in six years.

I put Lambo slightly ahead of Sark, but I see the argument. They have a ton in common, right down to the PLSS love.

Yes, Lambo inherited a stacked roster. However, I wouldn't classify taking over a team less than two weeks before the season opener, trying to fill the shoes of a legendary coach (who just resigned in large part to protest his own university's actions), including two years probation/bowl ban, scholarship reductions, and no tv revenue exactly a, "sweetheart opportunity."

The program was absolutely shook to the core when DJ resigned, make no qualms about it.

I recognize Lambo wasn't the best HC, but comparing him to Sark is over the line. Lambo dedicated 30+ years as a student, player and coach to UW, and he gets compared to that shitbag Sark, who was here for five? Did Sark ever beat 0regon_GFY? How about Ohio St? What about Miami? DIAFF.

I don't give a shit, dedicating your life to something, anything, for 30+ years deserves some fucking respect.

Go fuck yourselves.

Take this shit to Doogman where it belongs. You paint this dark picture for Lambo but facts are he inherited very talented teams. Probably more talented than any James team minus 1991 and 1984. The 1997 team actually had the talent to even match those teams. Throw in the fact that a different coach would have coached that squad up better and that team could have won a national title.

Lambo was slightly better than Sark but IMO both underachieved given the talent level. Both will have their Doogs like PLSS take away from his successor and give the credit to those dipshits as well.

AtomicDawg

I don't see much difference between lambo and sark in the end. If sark has losing records at USC I guess you would be right. I think he will be very similar though. Lambo apologists are some of the worst.

Lambo was handed an absolute machine of a football program. At that point UW was considered a national contender the previous 3 years.

He was the head coach for some of the WORST losses I remember at UW based off of the amount of talent he had. Nobody is perfect but these stuck out to me as moments where he had no clue wtf he was doing.

@ Oregon (Kenny Wheaton. Great red zone route as always)

Oregon 24-22 (Cost us a rose bowl)

USC 21-21 (Consider it a loss given that they blew it and cost us a rose bowl)

Notre Dame 29-21 @ home (WTF happened at the end? I am still confused)

@Notre Dame 54-20 (This became the first in a trend to get our asses kicked vs good opponents on the road)

Colorado 33-21 (I am still confused how we got our ass kicked when Dillon ran wild the first half)

Nebraska 27-14 (Osborne vs. Lambo LOL)

Oregon 31-28 (great start to the game vs oregon as always.)

@UCLA (52-28 see the trend of shitty road performances continuing here. How in the hell did that team give up 52 and lose by 24???)

@Nebraska 55-7 (Great road performance as always)

AFA 45-25 (But Lambo was a great Players Coach. THey love playing for him. They won't quit!)

digits

He_Needs_More_Time said:

Joe Stephanson said:

dnc said:

whatshouldicareabout said:

RoadDawg55 said:

I can't decide between Sark and Lambo. They both sucked.

Lambo had a Pac-10 championship. Sark's best year was 5-4 in conference.

True. OTOH, while Sark didn't take over the owen12 debacle that doog folklore likes to say he did, he didn't take over a a program coming off of 3 straight Rose Bowels with clearly established dominance in the northwest and most of the west coast either. Lambo inherited a sweetheart opportunity and never did better than splitting a conference title in six years.

I put Lambo slightly ahead of Sark, but I see the argument. They have a ton in common, right down to the PLSS love.

Yes, Lambo inherited a stacked roster. However, I wouldn't classify taking over a team less than two weeks before the season opener, trying to fill the shoes of a legendary coach (who just resigned in large part to protest his own university's actions), including two years probation/bowl ban, scholarship reductions, and no tv revenue exactly a, "sweetheart opportunity."

The program was absolutely shook to the core when DJ resigned, make no qualms about it.

I recognize Lambo wasn't the best HC, but comparing him to Sark is over the line. Lambo dedicated 30+ years as a student, player and coach to UW, and he gets compared to that shitbag Sark, who was here for five? Did Sark ever beat 0regon_GFY? How about Ohio St? What about Miami? DIAFF.

I don't give a shit, dedicating your life to something, anything, for 30+ years deserves some fucking respect.

Go fuck yourselves.

Take this shit to Doogman where it belongs. You paint this dark picture for Lambo but facts are he inherited very talented teams. Probably more talented than any James team minus 1991 and 1984. The 1997 team actually had the talent to even match those teams. Throw in the fact that a different coach would have coached that squad up better and that team could have won a national title.

Lambo was slightly better than Sark but IMO both underachieved given the talent level. Both will have their Doogs like PLSS take away from his successor and give the credit to those dipshits as well.

"I don't deal in hypotheticals."

topdawgnc

Joe Stephanson said:

dnc said:

whatshouldicareabout said:

RoadDawg55 said:

I can't decide between Sark and Lambo. They both sucked.

Lambo had a Pac-10 championship. Sark's best year was 5-4 in conference.

True. OTOH, while Sark didn't take over the owen12 debacle that doog folklore likes to say he did, he didn't take over a a program coming off of 3 straight Rose Bowels with clearly established dominance in the northwest and most of the west coast either. Lambo inherited a sweetheart opportunity and never did better than splitting a conference title in six years.

I put Lambo slightly ahead of Sark, but I see the argument. They have a ton in common, right down to the PLSS love.

Yes, Lambo inherited a stacked roster. However, I wouldn't classify taking over a team less than two weeks before the season opener, trying to fill the shoes of a legendary coach (who just resigned in large part to protest his own university's actions), including two years probation/bowl ban, scholarship reductions, and no tv revenue exactly a, "sweetheart opportunity."

The program was absolutely shook to the core when DJ resigned, make no qualms about it.

I recognize Lambo wasn't the best HC, but comparing him to Sark is over the line. Lambo dedicated 30+ years as a student, player and coach to UW, and he gets compared to that shitbag Sark, who was here for five? Did Sark ever beat 0regon_GFY? How about Ohio St? What about Miami? DIAFF.

I don't give a shit, dedicating your life to something, anything, for 30+ years deserves some fucking respect.

Go fuck yourselves.

Even Don James doesn't buy your shit:

James not surprised

Don James, the winningest football coach in Washington history, whom Lambright replaced, said he wasn't surprised by the decision.

"I feel sorry for all of those coaches and their families," he said. "I'm not privy to all of what's going on there right now, but to me it seems a bit premature.

"There is going to be criticism. There always is. A few years, people wanted to get rid of me. The key is to win. And in the final analysis, Jim didn't do enough of that to keep the pressure off of him."

HeretoBeatmyChest

He_Needs_More_Time said:

MikeDamone said:

whatshouldicareabout said:

MikeDamone said:

whatshouldicareabout said:

RoadDawg55 said:

I can't decide between Sark and Lambo. They both sucked.

Lambo had a Pac-10 championship. Sark's best year was 5-4 in conference.

Lambo did less with more. That 1996 and 1997 team's that tied for a pac 10 title and lost the holiday bowl and Aloha bowls were he most talented team of the last 20 years. And Lambo stumbled into 7 and 9 wins.

It was the 95 Sun Bowl team that won the Pac-10. Now let's never talk about 95 again.

Also, the argument that Lambo did less with more is true, but you could say the same for Sark, especially when you consider a team that had Locker, Polk, Kearse, Ta'amu, DTN, Bulter, Foster, and Trufant had a losing record.

You're right,should have said 1995 and 1996.

And yes, the same can be said for Sark....that truth and the lack of a forum to express it, is the reason this place exists.

The 1997 team sent 13 guys to the NFL following year and had a 7-4 regular season. Were ranked #2 in the country and top 10 until November.

That was the most depressing season ever even more than 2008.

Exactly. In 2008 I felt we'd win 4 games and even told friends (in an email) that if Locker gets hurt we could only win 2.

1997 is the biggest dissapointment since losing to UCLA in 1990 and blowing the Apple Cup in 1982.

AtomicDawg

Joe Stephanson said:

He_Needs_More_Time said:

Joe Stephanson said:

dnc said:

whatshouldicareabout said:

RoadDawg55 said:

I can't decide between Sark and Lambo. They both sucked.

Lambo had a Pac-10 championship. Sark's best year was 5-4 in conference.

True. OTOH, while Sark didn't take over the owen12 debacle that doog folklore likes to say he did, he didn't take over a a program coming off of 3 straight Rose Bowels with clearly established dominance in the northwest and most of the west coast either. Lambo inherited a sweetheart opportunity and never did better than splitting a conference title in six years.

I put Lambo slightly ahead of Sark, but I see the argument. They have a ton in common, right down to the PLSS love.

Yes, Lambo inherited a stacked roster. However, I wouldn't classify taking over a team less than two weeks before the season opener, trying to fill the shoes of a legendary coach (who just resigned in large part to protest his own university's actions), including two years probation/bowl ban, scholarship reductions, and no tv revenue exactly a, "sweetheart opportunity."

The program was absolutely shook to the core when DJ resigned, make no qualms about it.

I recognize Lambo wasn't the best HC, but comparing him to Sark is over the line. Lambo dedicated 30+ years as a student, player and coach to UW, and he gets compared to that shitbag Sark, who was here for five? Did Sark ever beat 0regon_GFY? How about Ohio St? What about Miami? DIAFF.

I don't give a shit, dedicating your life to something, anything, for 30+ years deserves some fucking respect.

Go fuck yourselves.

Take this shit to Doogman where it belongs. You paint this dark picture for Lambo but facts are he inherited very talented teams. Probably more talented than any James team minus 1991 and 1984. The 1997 team actually had the talent to even match those teams. Throw in the fact that a different coach would have coached that squad up better and that team could have won a national title.

Lambo was slightly better than Sark but IMO both underachieved given the talent level. Both will have their Doogs like PLSS take away from his successor and give the credit to those dipshits as well.

"I don't deal in hypotheticals."

If you don't think an average coach would have done better with the talent Lambo was given then I can't help you.

AtomicDawg

Joe Stephanson said:

dnc said:

whatshouldicareabout said:

RoadDawg55 said:

I can't decide between Sark and Lambo. They both sucked.

Lambo had a Pac-10 championship. Sark's best year was 5-4 in conference.

True. OTOH, while Sark didn't take over the owen12 debacle that doog folklore likes to say he did, he didn't take over a a program coming off of 3 straight Rose Bowels with clearly established dominance in the northwest and most of the west coast either. Lambo inherited a sweetheart opportunity and never did better than splitting a conference title in six years.

I put Lambo slightly ahead of Sark, but I see the argument. They have a ton in common, right down to the PLSS love.

Yes, Lambo inherited a stacked roster. However, I wouldn't classify taking over a team less than two weeks before the season opener, trying to fill the shoes of a legendary coach (who just resigned in large part to protest his own university's actions), including two years probation/bowl ban, scholarship reductions, and no tv revenue exactly a, "sweetheart opportunity."

The program was absolutely shook to the core when DJ resigned, make no qualms about it.

I recognize Lambo wasn't the best HC, but comparing him to Sark is over the line. Lambo dedicated 30+ years as a student, player and coach to UW, and he gets compared to that shitbag Sark, who was here for five? Did Sark ever beat 0regon_GFY? How about Ohio St? What about Miami? DIAFF.

I don't give a shit, dedicating your life to something, anything, for 30+ years deserves some fucking respect.

Go fuck yourselves.

You don't get credit for dedicating your life to something when you get paid.