A Reminder to all of you

Well said. Classy post.

You have always been one of my favorite poasters. Keep up the fantastic work.

Mad_Son

My sources have been saying the same things. There are a lot of rumors out there but they all point to this.

HeretoBeatmyChest

We are so lucky to have bananasandblondes. His posts and insight are why I subscribe.

Puppy steel thinks you need to start talking football. Bunch of fucking art majors.

Puppy steel thinks you need to start talking football. Bunch of fucking art majors.

Stick to selling toilets and sinks at Lowes Dabone.

Puppy steel thinks you need to start talking football. Bunch of fucking art majors.
Stick to selling toilets and sinks at Lowes Dabone.

My bad

I can't wait until 2017 and Kim is saying "you guys have no idea the damage that Sarkisian had done. I knew Sark wasn't the guy when he lost 41-0 to Stanford in 2010. He ran an undisciplined program where star athletes were getting busted for DUI's and Weed. The players were better at curling beer bottles than actual weights. That's why you need to give this current coach more time. Don't worry though guys Woodward gets it. Nobody could have predicted at the time that Sarkisian was going to fail. Woodward absolutely nailed this hire though so you guys need to stop worrying about this coach even though he has only gone 14-12 in his first two years at UW."

I can't wait until 2017 and Kim is saying "you guys have no idea the damage that Sarkisian had done. I knew Sark wasn't the guy when he lost 41-0 to Stanford in 2010. He ran an undisciplined program where star athletes were getting busted for DUI's and Weed. The players were better at curling beer bottles than actual weights. That's why you need to give this current coach more time. Don't worry though guys Woodward gets it. Nobody could have predicted at the time that Sarkisian was going to fail. Woodward absolutely nailed this hire though so you guys need to stop worrying about this coach even though he has only gone 14-12 in his first two years at UW."

Nominated!

Well said. Classy post.

tracker

I don't understand why you guys always bitch about Sark.

I mean. . .he hit the fucking cross-bar!

I can't wait until 2017 and Kim is saying "you guys have no idea the damage that Sarkisian had done. I knew Sark wasn't the guy when he lost 41-0 to Stanford in 2010. He ran an undisciplined program where star athletes were getting busted for DUI's and Weed. The players were better at curling beer bottles than actual weights. That's why you need to give this current coach more time. Don't worry though guys Woodward gets it. Nobody could have predicted at the time that Sarkisian was going to fail. Woodward absolutely nailed this hire though so you guys need to stop worrying about this coach even though he has only gone 14-12 in his first two years at UW."

POTD. Sadly that's pretty much exactly what will happen #thescript

The only part you left out is where Kim tells everyone that he was very critical of Sark on the boards during his tenure as coach. You wouldn't remember because you haven't been a member that long.

The only part you left out is where Kim tells everyone that he was very critical of Sark on the boards during his tenure as coach. You wouldn't remember because you haven't been a member that long.

Either way we all know they'll use revisionist history and point out the blowouts as reasons why they knew Sark wasn't the guy.

Like Softy claiming he knew the suddenly senior loss to Stanford in 2006 was the moment Ty wasn't the right coach even though he defended that loser until he was 0-6 in 2008.

I mean look at how these doogs praised Ty in december of 2007 for not being like Rick? "I'm glad Ty has at least cleaned up the program. Under Rick we had players breaking the law all the time. Rick was always out looking for other jobs. Rick ran an undisciplined program and neglected the OL".

Everything those fucks complained about Rick back in the Ty era Sark is currently doing. Only difference being Sark hasn't won a Rose Bowl like Rick did.

When Sark is eventually fired the Doogs will call him Rick 2.0, point to the soft teams, lack of discipline, lack of OL recruiting etc.. Then they'll get behind the next guy who obviously needs 5+ years to change the atmosphere, get his own guys in there. At that point I may as well learn the 8 clap and support Mora while he wins a 4th straight Rose Bowl.

RoadDawg55

I can't wait until 2017 and Kim is saying "you guys have no idea the damage that Sarkisian had done. I knew Sark wasn't the guy when he lost 41-0 to Stanford in 2010. He ran an undisciplined program where star athletes were getting busted for DUI's and Weed. The players were better at curling beer bottles than actual weights. That's why you need to give this current coach more time. Don't worry though guys Woodward gets it. Nobody could have predicted at the time that Sarkisian was going to fail. Woodward absolutely nailed this hire though so you guys need to stop worrying about this coach even though he has only gone 14-12 in his first two years at UW."

Take it to the Crystal Ball Forum or you're gone!

The only part you left out is where Kim tells everyone that he was very critical of Sark on the boards during his tenure as coach. You wouldn't remember because you haven't been a member that long.
Either way we all know they'll use revisionist history and point out the blowouts as reasons why they knew Sark wasn't the guy.

Like Softy claiming he knew the suddenly senior loss to Stanford in 2006 was the moment Ty wasn't the right coach even though he defended that loser until he was 0-6 in 2008.

I mean look at how these doogs praised Ty in december of 2007 for not being like Rick? "I'm glad Ty has at least cleaned up the program. Under Rick we had players breaking the law all the time. Rick was always out looking for other jobs. Rick ran an undisciplined program and neglected the OL".

Everything those fucks complained about Rick back in the Ty era Sark is currently doing. Only difference being Sark hasn't won a Rose Bowl like Rick did.

Softy is guilty, but not to the degree you're claiming. He never said he knew that Ty was the wrong guy in 2006. What he said was he was hearing horror stories about Ty back in 2006. Which still begs the question of why he supported Ty in Dec 2007. His sincere answer was he thought the recruiting uptick justified sticking with Ty.

The only part you left out is where Kim tells everyone that he was very critical of Sark on the boards during his tenure as coach. You wouldn't remember because you haven't been a member that long.
Either way we all know they'll use revisionist history and point out the blowouts as reasons why they knew Sark wasn't the guy.

Like Softy claiming he knew the suddenly senior loss to Stanford in 2006 was the moment Ty wasn't the right coach even though he defended that loser until he was 0-6 in 2008.

I mean look at how these doogs praised Ty in december of 2007 for not being like Rick? "I'm glad Ty has at least cleaned up the program. Under Rick we had players breaking the law all the time. Rick was always out looking for other jobs. Rick ran an undisciplined program and neglected the OL".

Everything those fucks complained about Rick back in the Ty era Sark is currently doing. Only difference being Sark hasn't won a Rose Bowl like Rick did.
Softy is guilty, but not to the degree you're claiming. He never said he knew that Ty was the wrong guy in 2006. What he said was he was hearing horror stories about Ty back in 2006. Which still begs the question of why he supported Ty in Dec 2007. His sincere answer was he thought the recruiting uptick justified sticking with Ty.

Still Derek if you are hearing "Horror stories" about a coach why are you publicly supporting that same coach a year later?

I personally think it was a cop out and revisionist history. So if Sark is fired is he going to again claim he heard "horror stories" ?

The only part you left out is where Kim tells everyone that he was very critical of Sark on the boards during his tenure as coach. You wouldn't remember because you haven't been a member that long.
Either way we all know they'll use revisionist history and point out the blowouts as reasons why they knew Sark wasn't the guy.

Like Softy claiming he knew the suddenly senior loss to Stanford in 2006 was the moment Ty wasn't the right coach even though he defended that loser until he was 0-6 in 2008.

I mean look at how these doogs praised Ty in december of 2007 for not being like Rick? "I'm glad Ty has at least cleaned up the program. Under Rick we had players breaking the law all the time. Rick was always out looking for other jobs. Rick ran an undisciplined program and neglected the OL".

Everything those fucks complained about Rick back in the Ty era Sark is currently doing. Only difference being Sark hasn't won a Rose Bowl like Rick did.
Softy is guilty, but not to the degree you're claiming. He never said he knew that Ty was the wrong guy in 2006. What he said was he was hearing horror stories about Ty back in 2006. Which still begs the question of why he supported Ty in Dec 2007. His sincere answer was he thought the recruiting uptick justified sticking with Ty.
Still Derek if you are hearing "Horror stories" about a coach why are you publicly supporting that same coach a year later?

I personally think it was a cop out and revisionist history. So if Sark is fired is he going to again claim he heard "horror stories" ?

well you would be wrong. Hugh Millen told me that Softy was genuinely supporting Ty not only publicly but privately as well, because of the recruiting. They disagreed vehemently in their conversations.

The only part you left out is where Kim tells everyone that he was very critical of Sark on the boards during his tenure as coach. You wouldn't remember because you haven't been a member that long.
Either way we all know they'll use revisionist history and point out the blowouts as reasons why they knew Sark wasn't the guy.

Like Softy claiming he knew the suddenly senior loss to Stanford in 2006 was the moment Ty wasn't the right coach even though he defended that loser until he was 0-6 in 2008.

I mean look at how these doogs praised Ty in december of 2007 for not being like Rick? "I'm glad Ty has at least cleaned up the program. Under Rick we had players breaking the law all the time. Rick was always out looking for other jobs. Rick ran an undisciplined program and neglected the OL".

Everything those fucks complained about Rick back in the Ty era Sark is currently doing. Only difference being Sark hasn't won a Rose Bowl like Rick did.
Softy is guilty, but not to the degree you're claiming. He never said he knew that Ty was the wrong guy in 2006. What he said was he was hearing horror stories about Ty back in 2006. Which still begs the question of why he supported Ty in Dec 2007. His sincere answer was he thought the recruiting uptick justified sticking with Ty.
Still Derek if you are hearing "Horror stories" about a coach why are you publicly supporting that same coach a year later?

I personally think it was a cop out and revisionist history. So if Sark is fired is he going to again claim he heard "horror stories" ?
well you would be wrong. Hugh Millen told me that Softy was genuinely supporting Ty not only publicly but privately as well, because of the recruiting. They disagreed vehemently in their conversations.

Hugh would paint a picture supporting Softy's failed position though. Of course Hugh isn't going to throw Softy under the bus and tell the truth. Truth being Softy works for KJR and there is no way he's ever going to suggest a UW coach be fired unless it is 100% supported.

Softy wasn't even coming out saying Holt should be canned right after the Baylor game. The only KJR member calling for Holt's head was Mitch(same guy who was calling for Ty's).

Softy being the "face" of Husky fan on a Husky station can't and won't ever call for a coaches head. He may have reasons and Hugh probably did tell you that.

But a big reason why Softy wanted Ty because like most media members in this town he's a pussy. Just like 710 with the Mariners, KJR is that way with UW sports. They will make excuses after excuses about the current guy then the minute he's gone will come out with all these "horror stories", "if you had only known the damage so and so had done", "I'm hearing he was mistreating the players", etc.

Lather, rinse, repeat.

CFetters_Nacho_Lover

The only part you left out is where Kim tells everyone that he was very critical of Sark on the boards during his tenure as coach. You wouldn't remember because you haven't been a member that long.
Either way we all know they'll use revisionist history and point out the blowouts as reasons why they knew Sark wasn't the guy.

Like Softy claiming he knew the suddenly senior loss to Stanford in 2006 was the moment Ty wasn't the right coach even though he defended that loser until he was 0-6 in 2008.

I mean look at how these doogs praised Ty in december of 2007 for not being like Rick? "I'm glad Ty has at least cleaned up the program. Under Rick we had players breaking the law all the time. Rick was always out looking for other jobs. Rick ran an undisciplined program and neglected the OL".

Everything those fucks complained about Rick back in the Ty era Sark is currently doing. Only difference being Sark hasn't won a Rose Bowl like Rick did.
Softy is guilty, but not to the degree you're claiming. He never said he knew that Ty was the wrong guy in 2006. What he said was he was hearing horror stories about Ty back in 2006. Which still begs the question of why he supported Ty in Dec 2007. His sincere answer was he thought the recruiting uptick justified sticking with Ty.
Still Derek if you are hearing "Horror stories" about a coach why are you publicly supporting that same coach a year later?

I personally think it was a cop out and revisionist history. So if Sark is fired is he going to again claim he heard "horror stories" ?

As much as I dislike Softy, I'll give him some benefit of the doubt with this. Everyone in the media, the school, etc. loved them some Tyrone Willingham. Ty talked a good game with the molder of men bullshit.

If that's what you know of him, you're going to probably discount some of the horror stories because they don't match the person that you know.

And a obligatory Softy is one of the people quite deserving of 0-1200000000

Comments

TMacDawg

Sounds like you have some perspective.

TierbsHsotBoobs

That looks like a Kim Grinolds original.

Well said. Classy post.

You have always been one of my favorite poasters. Keep up the fantastic work.

Mad_Son

My sources have been saying the same things. There are a lot of rumors out there but they all point to this.

HeretoBeatmyChest

We are so lucky to have bananasandblondes. His posts and insight are why I subscribe.

Puppy steel thinks you need to start talking football. Bunch of fucking art majors.

Puppy steel thinks you need to start talking football. Bunch of fucking art majors.

Stick to selling toilets and sinks at Lowes Dabone.

Puppy steel thinks you need to start talking football. Bunch of fucking art majors.
Stick to selling toilets and sinks at Lowes Dabone.

My bad

I can't wait until 2017 and Kim is saying "you guys have no idea the damage that Sarkisian had done. I knew Sark wasn't the guy when he lost 41-0 to Stanford in 2010. He ran an undisciplined program where star athletes were getting busted for DUI's and Weed. The players were better at curling beer bottles than actual weights. That's why you need to give this current coach more time. Don't worry though guys Woodward gets it. Nobody could have predicted at the time that Sarkisian was going to fail. Woodward absolutely nailed this hire though so you guys need to stop worrying about this coach even though he has only gone 14-12 in his first two years at UW."

Nominated!

Well said. Classy post.

tracker

I don't understand why you guys always bitch about Sark.

I mean. . .he hit the fucking cross-bar!

I can't wait until 2017 and Kim is saying "you guys have no idea the damage that Sarkisian had done. I knew Sark wasn't the guy when he lost 41-0 to Stanford in 2010. He ran an undisciplined program where star athletes were getting busted for DUI's and Weed. The players were better at curling beer bottles than actual weights. That's why you need to give this current coach more time. Don't worry though guys Woodward gets it. Nobody could have predicted at the time that Sarkisian was going to fail. Woodward absolutely nailed this hire though so you guys need to stop worrying about this coach even though he has only gone 14-12 in his first two years at UW."

POTD. Sadly that's pretty much exactly what will happen #thescript

The only part you left out is where Kim tells everyone that he was very critical of Sark on the boards during his tenure as coach. You wouldn't remember because you haven't been a member that long.

The only part you left out is where Kim tells everyone that he was very critical of Sark on the boards during his tenure as coach. You wouldn't remember because you haven't been a member that long.

RoadDawg55

I can't wait until 2017 and Kim is saying "you guys have no idea the damage that Sarkisian had done. I knew Sark wasn't the guy when he lost 41-0 to Stanford in 2010. He ran an undisciplined program where star athletes were getting busted for DUI's and Weed. The players were better at curling beer bottles than actual weights. That's why you need to give this current coach more time. Don't worry though guys Woodward gets it. Nobody could have predicted at the time that Sarkisian was going to fail. Woodward absolutely nailed this hire though so you guys need to stop worrying about this coach even though he has only gone 14-12 in his first two years at UW."

Take it to the Crystal Ball Forum or you're gone!

The only part you left out is where Kim tells everyone that he was very critical of Sark on the boards during his tenure as coach. You wouldn't remember because you haven't been a member that long.
Either way we all know they'll use revisionist history and point out the blowouts as reasons why they knew Sark wasn't the guy.

Like Softy claiming he knew the suddenly senior loss to Stanford in 2006 was the moment Ty wasn't the right coach even though he defended that loser until he was 0-6 in 2008.

I mean look at how these doogs praised Ty in december of 2007 for not being like Rick? "I'm glad Ty has at least cleaned up the program. Under Rick we had players breaking the law all the time. Rick was always out looking for other jobs. Rick ran an undisciplined program and neglected the OL".

Everything those fucks complained about Rick back in the Ty era Sark is currently doing. Only difference being Sark hasn't won a Rose Bowl like Rick did.

The only part you left out is where Kim tells everyone that he was very critical of Sark on the boards during his tenure as coach. You wouldn't remember because you haven't been a member that long.
Either way we all know they'll use revisionist history and point out the blowouts as reasons why they knew Sark wasn't the guy.

Like Softy claiming he knew the suddenly senior loss to Stanford in 2006 was the moment Ty wasn't the right coach even though he defended that loser until he was 0-6 in 2008.

I mean look at how these doogs praised Ty in december of 2007 for not being like Rick? "I'm glad Ty has at least cleaned up the program. Under Rick we had players breaking the law all the time. Rick was always out looking for other jobs. Rick ran an undisciplined program and neglected the OL".

Everything those fucks complained about Rick back in the Ty era Sark is currently doing. Only difference being Sark hasn't won a Rose Bowl like Rick did.
Softy is guilty, but not to the degree you're claiming. He never said he knew that Ty was the wrong guy in 2006. What he said was he was hearing horror stories about Ty back in 2006. Which still begs the question of why he supported Ty in Dec 2007. His sincere answer was he thought the recruiting uptick justified sticking with Ty.

The only part you left out is where Kim tells everyone that he was very critical of Sark on the boards during his tenure as coach. You wouldn't remember because you haven't been a member that long.
Either way we all know they'll use revisionist history and point out the blowouts as reasons why they knew Sark wasn't the guy.

Like Softy claiming he knew the suddenly senior loss to Stanford in 2006 was the moment Ty wasn't the right coach even though he defended that loser until he was 0-6 in 2008.

I mean look at how these doogs praised Ty in december of 2007 for not being like Rick? "I'm glad Ty has at least cleaned up the program. Under Rick we had players breaking the law all the time. Rick was always out looking for other jobs. Rick ran an undisciplined program and neglected the OL".

Everything those fucks complained about Rick back in the Ty era Sark is currently doing. Only difference being Sark hasn't won a Rose Bowl like Rick did.
Softy is guilty, but not to the degree you're claiming. He never said he knew that Ty was the wrong guy in 2006. What he said was he was hearing horror stories about Ty back in 2006. Which still begs the question of why he supported Ty in Dec 2007. His sincere answer was he thought the recruiting uptick justified sticking with Ty.
Still Derek if you are hearing "Horror stories" about a coach why are you publicly supporting that same coach a year later?

I personally think it was a cop out and revisionist history. So if Sark is fired is he going to again claim he heard "horror stories" ?