Home› Chuck's Fisch Bowl (Recruiting)

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

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

Petersen only won with

RaceBannonRaceBannon Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 104,547 Founders Club
in Chuck's Fisch Bowl (Recruiting)
Sark players


If this is leveling up then let's get down instead
· Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
«1

Comments

  • PurpleJPurpleJ Member Posts: 36,947 Founders Club
    edited November 2019
    Last year wasn’t Sark players, but still.



    Qb guru status and soft OL. At least Neu was smart enough to run option with Tui.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • RaceBannonRaceBannon Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 104,547 Founders Club
    PurpleJ said:

    Last year wasn’t Sark players, but still.



    Qb guru status and soft OL. At least Neu was smart enough to run option with Tui.

    I just want to see the world burn
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • minion_doogminion_doog Member Posts: 1,982
    My favorite play of all time is a 3rd and 3 option, Eason QB keeper.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • whlinderwhlinder Member Posts: 4,607 Standard Supporter
    Pickett committed to Lambright originally. He reconfirmed to Neu.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Avatarsare4fagsAvatarsare4fags Member Posts: 125
    You know your program is doomed when your Lawyer Coach shows more humility than your Life Coach.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • whatshouldicareaboutwhatshouldicareabout Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 12,711 Swaye's Wigwam
    RaceBannon said:

    Sark players


    If this is leveling up then let's get down instead

    We've leveled-up with the players. Now we just need to level up with the gameday coaching.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • OneNippleOneNipple Member Posts: 179
    Well Sark didnt win with his own players so Peterson has that on Sark!
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • GrundleStiltzkinGrundleStiltzkin Member Posts: 61,486 Standard Supporter
    RaceBannon said:

    Sark players


    If this is leveling up then let's get down instead

    I honestly don’t disagree
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • RoadDawg55RoadDawg55 Member Posts: 30,123
    Down year. Our overall talent and depth is better than Sark’s.

    There were really only a handful of Sark players that did anything in 2016. Victor, Bierria, Qualls, and Eldrenkamp.

    The leveling up stuff was always bullshit. We are a top 10-20 team in recruiting. We are underachieving. The talent has only been part of the problem. Pete’s had a horrible year as the coach. I think there has been some complacency that has set in.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • YellowSnowYellowSnow Moderator, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 34,990 Founders Club
    RoadDawg55 said:

    Down year. Our overall talent and depth is better than Sark’s.

    There were really only a handful of Sark players that did anything in 2016. Victor, Bierria, Qualls, and Eldrenkamp.

    The leveling up stuff was always bullshit. We are a top 10-20 team in recruiting. We are underachieving. The talent has only been part of the problem. Pete’s had a horrible year as the coach. I think there has been some complacency that has set in.

    Agree. The analogy to Rick winning Lambo's players just doesn't work very well here. 2016 was heavily filled with Pete's guys. 2017- 18 were pretty much all Pete guys.


    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • YellowSnowYellowSnow Moderator, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 34,990 Founders Club
    RaceBannon said:

    YellowSnow said:

    RoadDawg55 said:

    Down year. Our overall talent and depth is better than Sark’s.

    There were really only a handful of Sark players that did anything in 2016. Victor, Bierria, Qualls, and Eldrenkamp.

    The leveling up stuff was always bullshit. We are a top 10-20 team in recruiting. We are underachieving. The talent has only been part of the problem. Pete’s had a horrible year as the coach. I think there has been some complacency that has set in.

    Agree. The analogy to Rick winning Lambo's players just doesn't work very well here. 2016 was heavily filled with Pete's guys. 2017- 18 were pretty much all Pete guys.


    The analogy didn't work with Rick either. That's the joke

    The best of the new talent is either on the bench or coming in next spring and fall.

    The recruiting gaps have us relying on youngsters to play positions where adults do better like the front 7 on defense. And playing guys that should have hit the portal already when replaced by better players

    This has been Pete's team since 2016 and good or bad it belongs to him
    Absolutely. I know only losers talk about recruiting, but the fact of the matter is that the 2016 (6th in PAC) and 2017 (5th in PAC) classes weren't good enough in key positions. I thought we could throw some duck tape on it, but it hasn't worked out.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • FireCohenFireCohen Member Posts: 21,823
    Pete lost his balls and edge on those boat rides on montlake. His Boise teams were tough dirty fuckers. This team is soft and weak
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • GwadGwad Member Posts: 2,855
    We knew these dark times were coming. If you didn't you were dooging it up during the off season.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • YellowSnowYellowSnow Moderator, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 34,990 Founders Club
    DoogCourics said:

    RaceBannon said:

    YellowSnow said:

    RoadDawg55 said:

    Down year. Our overall talent and depth is better than Sark’s.

    There were really only a handful of Sark players that did anything in 2016. Victor, Bierria, Qualls, and Eldrenkamp.

    The leveling up stuff was always bullshit. We are a top 10-20 team in recruiting. We are underachieving. The talent has only been part of the problem. Pete’s had a horrible year as the coach. I think there has been some complacency that has set in.

    Agree. The analogy to Rick winning Lambo's players just doesn't work very well here. 2016 was heavily filled with Pete's guys. 2017- 18 were pretty much all Pete guys.


    The analogy didn't work with Rick either. That's the joke

    The best of the new talent is either on the bench or coming in next spring and fall.

    The recruiting gaps have us relying on youngsters to play positions where adults do better like the front 7 on defense. And playing guys that should have hit the portal already when replaced by better players

    This has been Pete's team since 2016 and good or bad it belongs to him
    Spot on. The recruiting gaps have fucked UW so hard and it's definitely all on Pete. Aside from the in game fuck ups, what has been the biggest holes on the team that have cost us games?

    - Veteran WR who can't get open and catch balls. Leaving us screaming for the young guys to get in, but where are the Juniors? And the only Sophomore has FINALLY gotten some run and looks awesome.

    - Veteran ILB who fill the wrong gaps, get washed out, don't know their run fits, and miss tackles. Leaving us screaming for the young guys to get in, but where are the Juniors and the Sophomores? The only guys left are fucking Freshman. You should never rely on Freshman to win. You play Freshman because they are so fucking good you can't keep them off the field.


    This chart tells all you need to know, just look at those two positions and you'll see the fuckups. You shouldn't have 2 Upperclassmen ILB and 6 Freshmen. You shouldn't have 3 Upperclassmen DL and 8 Freshmen. And you shouldn't have 4 Upperclassmen WR who are all 5'10" or under and play the exact same game and drop fucking balls..





    Also, you'll note that of the 44 Blue Chips for the 2019 Season, 27 are RS Frosh and True Frosh combined.

    Just 2 Sophomores, 11 more Juniors, 4 Seniors. So not only is the majority of the high end "talent" young, there are major gaps in years of where it is dispersed.

    And yes I know that not all talent comes from just Blue Chips, because a lot of our 3 stars like Harris, Kirkland, Otton, etc. have balled out anyway. I'm just highlighting the recruiting gaps and inconsistencies from Pete and Co.

    Sad truth of the matter is that BOTH coaching and recruiting are critical. Too many 2016 and 17 holes + some coaching gaffes will get you 4 losses in a hurry.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • NoWarningJustDawgNoWarningJustDawg Member Posts: 1,000
    Quite a bit was made of UW producing NFL talent like few teams but Bama, Clemson, tOSU, Oklahoma. It was and I assume still is a program selling point.

    Now, how much is actually development and how much is us getting lucky with players who were better than initially evaluated is another debate, but clearly if you're going to pump players into the league like Bama you need to be replacing them like Bama. It has to be a constant focus. You can't fucking take an Incomplete at multiple positions for multiple years. And the better-than-your-competitors development has to continue.

    ...Then contrast that with Pete liking to take the spring off recruiting to focus on the team. Or just in general - maybe he truly loves it but the impression he gives off is that recruiting is a PITA for him. And it doesn't take failing long to erode that "UW develops players into NFL picks" perception.

    If your selling point is that you have a clean program that will develop PSAs as well or better than anyone else, then you have to follow through or get coaches who will.

    Pete, open yourself to real change to your system and comfort zone, and make necessary changes to your staff, or GTFO. No more excuses.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • RoadDawg55RoadDawg55 Member Posts: 30,123
    YellowSnow said:

    RoadDawg55 said:

    Down year. Our overall talent and depth is better than Sark’s.

    There were really only a handful of Sark players that did anything in 2016. Victor, Bierria, Qualls, and Eldrenkamp.

    The leveling up stuff was always bullshit. We are a top 10-20 team in recruiting. We are underachieving. The talent has only been part of the problem. Pete’s had a horrible year as the coach. I think there has been some complacency that has set in.

    We over achieved bigly in 2016- 18 based on recruiting. 2019 is our first underachieving year.

    2016

    1st in PAC; #4 Final Ranking

    247 College Team Composite - #24 Nationally; #6 in PAC
    Average Rank in PAC of 2012- 16 Classes- #6

    2017

    Tied for 2nd in PAC; #15 Final Ranking

    247 College Team Composite - #24 Nationally; #6 in PAC
    Average Rank in PAC of 2013- 17 Classes- #6

    2018

    1st in PAC; #13 Final Ranking

    247 College Team Composite - #20 Nationally; #4 in PAC
    Average Rank in PAC of 2014- 18 Classes- #4

    2019

    247 College Team Composite - #19 Nationally; #3 in PAC
    Average Rank in PAC of 2015- 19 Classes- #4
    I think the better you do as a team in the previous seasons, the better the players are ranked.

    A player that commits to Alabama is going to be a four or five star. That same player with the same ability that commits to Kentucky gets rated lower.

    We were really good in 2016 so we got slight inflations for our future players. It’s just a theory, but I’ve thought it to be true for awhile.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • YellowSnowYellowSnow Moderator, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 34,990 Founders Club
    RoadDawg55 said:

    YellowSnow said:

    RoadDawg55 said:

    Down year. Our overall talent and depth is better than Sark’s.

    There were really only a handful of Sark players that did anything in 2016. Victor, Bierria, Qualls, and Eldrenkamp.

    The leveling up stuff was always bullshit. We are a top 10-20 team in recruiting. We are underachieving. The talent has only been part of the problem. Pete’s had a horrible year as the coach. I think there has been some complacency that has set in.

    We over achieved bigly in 2016- 18 based on recruiting. 2019 is our first underachieving year.

    2016

    1st in PAC; #4 Final Ranking

    247 College Team Composite - #24 Nationally; #6 in PAC
    Average Rank in PAC of 2012- 16 Classes- #6

    2017

    Tied for 2nd in PAC; #15 Final Ranking

    247 College Team Composite - #24 Nationally; #6 in PAC
    Average Rank in PAC of 2013- 17 Classes- #6

    2018

    1st in PAC; #13 Final Ranking

    247 College Team Composite - #20 Nationally; #4 in PAC
    Average Rank in PAC of 2014- 18 Classes- #4

    2019

    247 College Team Composite - #19 Nationally; #3 in PAC
    Average Rank in PAC of 2015- 19 Classes- #4
    I think the better you do as a team in the previous seasons, the better the players are ranked.

    A player that commits to Alabama is going to be a four or five star. That same player with the same ability that commits to Kentucky gets rated lower.

    We were really good in 2016 so we got slight inflations for our future players. It’s just a theory, but I’ve thought it to be true for awhile.
    This seems plausible.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
Sign In or Register to comment.