Most doogs would like these helmets. Not surprised one bit.
I like the helmets, but I don't like the timing or context of it. Sark is going no huddle just like Chip did. We're modeling our helmets just like the Ducks design theirs. This all sends a message that we're disregarding our own traditions in order to try to be like Oregon. And I don't like it, nor do I think it's necessary in order to be successful.
I think you're over thinking this. Sarks going no huddle because lots of people are and it works. They're changing the helmets because lots of people are. I don't know if it helps in recruiting or not though.
Oregon was the first or one of the first to start a lot of things that are popular now. UW is just following the herd not trying to be like Oregon. Although there would be nothing wrong with trying to be like Oregon IMHO.
The herd is trying to be like Oregon.
HTH
I think "everyone else is doing this, we should do it too" is different from "let's try and be just like Oregon".
I agree with that.
The problem I see is that Sark isn't doing any of the Oregon stuff better than Oregon does.
It's just further confirmation that Washington is truly Oregon's little brother now.
Yeah and there is plenty of criticism to be given for being just one of the herd. Great coaches innovate, mediocore coaches take that innovation, put their mediocore stink on it and its never quite as good.
Most doogs would like these helmets. Not surprised one bit.
I like the helmets, but I don't like the timing or context of it. Sark is going no huddle just like Chip did. We're modeling our helmets just like the Ducks design theirs. This all sends a message that we're disregarding our own traditions in order to try to be like Oregon. And I don't like it, nor do I think it's necessary in order to be successful.
Sarks going no huddle because lots of people are and it works.
WSU tried the no huddle last year and it completely failed. Leach somehow posted a worse record than WULFF!
Most doogs would like these helmets. Not surprised one bit.
I like the helmets, but I don't like the timing or context of it. Sark is going no huddle just like Chip did. We're modeling our helmets just like the Ducks design theirs. This all sends a message that we're disregarding our own traditions in order to try to be like Oregon. And I don't like it, nor do I think it's necessary in order to be successful.
Sarks going no huddle because lots of people are and it works.
WSU tried the no huddle last year and it completely failed. Leach somehow posted a worse record than WULFF!
If alabama doesn't need to change its helmets to recruit well and win games, why do we? Of course, I could be just a curmudgeon.
Looks like a domer , but where did the Purple upside-down "M" come from and what could it symbolize? Montlake gone belly-up on Husky tradition,perhaps? I notice that the stripes are slowly disappearing and the dark or black helmet could easily revert back to Lambo's solid Purple recalling not only the shortcomings of his program, but also the lowpoint of his idle, Jim Owens' coaching career. For those who believe the kids like this ugly football apparel, keep in mind that in football, those who go on the field thinking about how good they look will be eating turf and taking it in the earhole in no time. Of course, there's practice and looking good on the sidelines in case a cute cheerleader walks on by and TV for the folks back home.
my read is that we're installing the no-huddle to get our defense ready to face it. I think sark is a purist (to a liability) and doesn't want to use the no huddle unless we've caught the opponent in a bad player package.
my read is that we're installing the no-huddle to get our defense ready to face it. I think sark is a purist (to a liability) and doesn't want to use the no huddle unless we've caught the opponent in a bad player package.
If by purist, you mean a guy who emphasizes the skill positions and prefers to trick the defense by fancy play calls than physical, fundamental football, then yes, he is a purist.
my read is that we're installing the no-huddle to get our defense ready to face it. I think sark is a purist (to a liability) and doesn't want to use the no huddle unless we've caught the opponent in a bad player package.
If by purist, you mean a guy who emphasizes the skill positions and prefers to trick the defense by fancy play calls than physical, fundamental football, then yes, he is a purist.
He wants to be a purist but he just doesn't get it. He may err on the side of passing over rushing which in some offenses can be a viable option, given the right quarterback, but he wants to run a traditional offense. He just doesn't understand the importance of linemen. He doesn't understand being physical. He doesn't understand how to set a foundation and wear down an opponent. You'd think Jason Chorak would have made him understand the need for OL... maybe the problem is he took a few too many hits...
my read is that we're installing the no-huddle to get our defense ready to face it. I think sark is a purist (to a liability) and doesn't want to use the no huddle unless we've caught the opponent in a bad player package.
If by purist, you mean a guy who emphasizes the skill positions and prefers to trick the defense by fancy play calls than physical, fundamental football, then yes, he is a purist.
thats exactly what I mean, he'll take a whole quarter setting up a play action bomb instead of just shoving the ball down their throat. He never used Polk unless he had to, he hates ugly football, even though we love it and it works. But, hesitantly, I think he's learning.
I hope Tosh puts together a good DL so that he realizes how much our OL sucks.
my read is that we're installing the no-huddle to get our defense ready to face it. I think sark is a purist (to a liability) and doesn't want to use the no huddle unless we've caught the opponent in a bad player package.
If by purist, you mean a guy who emphasizes the skill positions and prefers to trick the defense by fancy play calls than physical, fundamental football, then yes, he is a purist.
thats exactly what I mean, he'll take a whole quarter setting up a play action bomb instead of just shoving the ball down their throat. He never used Polk unless he had to, he hates ugly football, even though we love it and it works. But, hesitantly, I think he's learning.
I hope Tosh puts together a good DL so that he realizes how much our OL sucks.
My personal opinion is he hates "ugly football" because he wants to be known as an one of the best offensive minds in college football. He likes to receive the credit for his cute play calls. Anyone can call dives, powers, counters, and sweeps. There is no innovation in that, so it bores Sark.
I am curious to hear why you think he is learning. I don't agree with that at all. If there was ever a time for him to run 70% of the time, it was last year. He had an OL that sucked at pass blocking, a QB who was shell shocked and immobile, a WR corps with only two reliable options, and a stud RB. I didn't see a coach who was learning, I saw the same stubborn coach who runs what he wants to run whether it suits his personnel or not.
my read is that we're installing the no-huddle to get our defense ready to face it. I think sark is a purist (to a liability) and doesn't want to use the no huddle unless we've caught the opponent in a bad player package.
If by purist, you mean a guy who emphasizes the skill positions and prefers to trick the defense by fancy play calls than physical, fundamental football, then yes, he is a purist.
thats exactly what I mean, he'll take a whole quarter setting up a play action bomb instead of just shoving the ball down their throat. He never used Polk unless he had to, he hates ugly football, even though we love it and it works. But, hesitantly, I think he's learning.
I hope Tosh puts together a good DL so that he realizes how much our OL sucks.
If Sark needs a quality DL at UW to realize our OL sucks then he's even dumber than I thought.
my read is that we're installing the no-huddle to get our defense ready to face it. I think sark is a purist (to a liability) and doesn't want to use the no huddle unless we've caught the opponent in a bad player package.
If by purist, you mean a guy who emphasizes the skill positions and prefers to trick the defense by fancy play calls than physical, fundamental football, then yes, he is a purist.
thats exactly what I mean, he'll take a whole quarter setting up a play action bomb instead of just shoving the ball down their throat. He never used Polk unless he had to, he hates ugly football, even though we love it and it works. But, hesitantly, I think he's learning.
I hope Tosh puts together a good DL so that he realizes how much our OL sucks.
My personal opinion is he hates "ugly football" because he wants to be known as an one of the best offensive minds in college football. He likes to receive the credit for his cute play calls. Anyone can call dives, powers, counters, and sweeps. There is no innovation in that, so it bores Sark.
I am curious to hear why you think he is learning. I don't agree with that at all. If there was ever a time for him to run 70% of the time, it was last year. He had an OL that sucked at pass blocking, a QB who was shell shocked and immobile, a WR corps with only two reliable options, and a stud RB. I didn't see a coach who was learning, I saw the same stubborn coach who runs what he wants to run whether it suits his personnel or not.
i think he's realizing that UW doesn't give a shit about a beautiful passing attack, which apparently is beyond confusing to him. it should hopefully make him want to go someplace else, hopefully he goes when Wilcox leaves or we're in more trouble.
I don't know who said it but Sark wants to hear how great of a play caller he is. After the Stanford game, we found out that Sark watches the tv broadcast while Wilcox watches the coaches one which has multiple angles (sideline, end zone).
Comments
Wins>>>>>>>>>fucking helmets
True DAWGS keep OUR boards clean of Whoregon fans!
I hope Tosh puts together a good DL so that he realizes how much our OL sucks.
I am curious to hear why you think he is learning. I don't agree with that at all. If there was ever a time for him to run 70% of the time, it was last year. He had an OL that sucked at pass blocking, a QB who was shell shocked and immobile, a WR corps with only two reliable options, and a stud RB. I didn't see a coach who was learning, I saw the same stubborn coach who runs what he wants to run whether it suits his personnel or not.
At USC you always have the most talent so it doesn't matter what you call you will put up big numbers.
He was only the OC at USC for two fucking years!! Why it was such a reckless hire.