Some chinteresting data on Pete's last 3 years from WestCoastCFB
Still 3rd best in Pac at outperforming talent on roster.
Comments
-
You are better than thjs
-
What does this even mean? Go get back on the bus and carry on.FireCohen said:You are better than thjs
-
This was well-derided yesterday https://hardcorehusky.com/discussion/comment/1271933/#Comment_1271933
-
Ah shit. I need to do better about looking in Husky Jacks. FML.GrundleStiltzkin said:This was well-derided yesterday https://hardcorehusky.com/discussion/comment/1271933/#Comment_1271933
-
Of course, the problem with this stat is that, if you have talent like Washington has, your comparator group is going to be comprised of very good teams.
Conversely, when you don't have talent, you only need to beat teams that have more talent, but are not necessarily good themselves. Shit beats slightly less shit all the tim. It's a different thing to beat genuinely good teams.
I'm not apologizing for Toothy; and this stat can reveal coaches who underperform with what they have. But there's a reason Cuog is atop this poll and it's not all because of the Pirate. Cuog's comparator group is not a murderer's row, and he has that passing game that will allow him to beat some teams who may be better overall, but not necessarily elite or even very good. -
Good analysis here Creep.creepycoug said:Of course, the problem with this stat is that, if you have talent like Washington has, your comparator group is going to be comprised of very good teams.
Conversely, when you don't have talent, you only need to beat teams that have more talent, but are not necessarily good themselves. Shit beats slightly less shit all the tim. It's a different thing to beat genuinely good teams.
I'm not apologizing for Toothy; and this stat can reveal coaches who underperform with what they have. But there's a reason Cuog is atop this poll and it's not all because of the Pirate. Cuog's comparator group is not a murderer's row, and he has that passing game that will allow him to beat some teams who may be better overall, but not necessarily elite or even very good.
The 5 wins were as follows...
2017 UCLA and Oregon (they were one spot higher than us in 247 composite that year)
2018 Stanford and UCLA
2019 USC
Not exactly murderer's row. -
The world's toughest schedule stat suffers the samecreepycoug said:Of course, the problem with this stat is that, if you have talent like Washington has, your comparator group is going to be comprised of very good teams.
Conversely, when you don't have talent, you only need to beat teams that have more talent, but are not necessarily good themselves. Shit beats slightly less shit all the tim. It's a different thing to beat genuinely good teams.
I'm not apologizing for Toothy; and this stat can reveal coaches who underperform with what they have. But there's a reason Cuog is atop this poll and it's not all because of the Pirate. Cuog's comparator group is not a murderer's row, and he has that passing game that will allow him to beat some teams who may be better overall, but not necessarily elite or even very good.
The worst teams always have the toughest schedules. Now ask yourself why -
Yup. There you have it.YellowSnow said:
Good analysis here Creep.creepycoug said:Of course, the problem with this stat is that, if you have talent like Washington has, your comparator group is going to be comprised of very good teams.
Conversely, when you don't have talent, you only need to beat teams that have more talent, but are not necessarily good themselves. Shit beats slightly less shit all the tim. It's a different thing to beat genuinely good teams.
I'm not apologizing for Toothy; and this stat can reveal coaches who underperform with what they have. But there's a reason Cuog is atop this poll and it's not all because of the Pirate. Cuog's comparator group is not a murderer's row, and he has that passing game that will allow him to beat some teams who may be better overall, but not necessarily elite or even very good.
The 5 wins were as follows...
2017 UCLA and Oregon (they were one spot higher than us in 247 composite that year)
2018 Stanford and UCLA
2019 USC
Not exactly murderer's row.
But, but, but we do more with less.
I hate the fucking saying. It's for losers. -
Looking ahead to the 247 composite 2020 rankings, there were only be 3 teams ahead of UW on the schedule in terms of overall talent: USC, Oregon and Michigan and if they are ranked higher then us it's only by a c-hair.creepycoug said:
Yup. There you have it.YellowSnow said:
Good analysis here Creep.creepycoug said:Of course, the problem with this stat is that, if you have talent like Washington has, your comparator group is going to be comprised of very good teams.
Conversely, when you don't have talent, you only need to beat teams that have more talent, but are not necessarily good themselves. Shit beats slightly less shit all the tim. It's a different thing to beat genuinely good teams.
I'm not apologizing for Toothy; and this stat can reveal coaches who underperform with what they have. But there's a reason Cuog is atop this poll and it's not all because of the Pirate. Cuog's comparator group is not a murderer's row, and he has that passing game that will allow him to beat some teams who may be better overall, but not necessarily elite or even very good.
The 5 wins were as follows...
2017 UCLA and Oregon (they were one spot higher than us in 247 composite that year)
2018 Stanford and UCLA
2019 USC
Not exactly murderer's row.
But, but, but we do more with less.
I hate the fucking saying. It's for losers.
Jimmy really needs to go 10-2 or better to instill a lot of confidence in the half brain segment of the fan base. I will tolerate 9-3 but won't be happy. -
Fun time ridding those back in the dayYellowSnow said:
What does this even mean? Go get back on the bus and carry on.FireCohen said:You are better than thjs
-
Eat shitYellowSnow said:
Ah shit. I need to do better about looking in Husky Jacks. FML.GrundleStiltzkin said:This was well-derided yesterday https://hardcorehusky.com/discussion/comment/1271933/#Comment_1271933
-
You're turrible at this some days Weak Arms. Just turrible.FireCohen said:
Eat shitYellowSnow said:
Ah shit. I need to do better about looking in Husky Jacks. FML.GrundleStiltzkin said:This was well-derided yesterday https://hardcorehusky.com/discussion/comment/1271933/#Comment_1271933
-
FireCohen said:
Fun time ridding those back in the dayYellowSnow said:
What does this even mean? Go get back on the bus and carry on.FireCohen said:You are better than thjs
-
So my neuheisal compassion is being proven out more every day.
Rick without the Rosebowl win. -
Rick says Toothy can win a Rose Bowl and then pop off. We're? waiting.MikeDamone said:So my neuheisal compassion is being proven out more every day.
Rick without the Rosebowl win. -
Stats are for losers
-
main stat is wins and lossesBonedog said:Stats are for losers
get enough wins and we're talking gay offs and rose bowls, which he did, so I'm not going to sit here and trash Chris
but 2014, 2015, and 2019 were Sarkesque and he's barely better than Rick, if at all. Rick left after 7-6. He left after 7-5... -
Rick won a Rose Bowl and beat Miami when they were good. Toothy doesn’t have a win in that zip code.Fire_Marshall_Bill said:
main stat is wins and lossesBonedog said:Stats are for losers
get enough wins and we're talking gay offs and rose bowls, which he did, so I'm not going to sit here and trash Chris
but 2014, 2015, and 2019 were Sarkesque and he's barely better than Rick, if at all. Rick left after 7-6. He left after 7-5...
Rick > Toothy and it’s not close. -
You’ve never had compassion for nobody.MikeDamone said:So my neuheisal compassion is being proven out more every day.
Rick without the Rosebowl win. -
Not trueLawrence_of_a_Labia said:
You’ve never had compassion for nobody.MikeDamone said:So my neuheisal compassion is being proven out more every day.
Rick without the Rosebowl win.
*Comparison . -
Pete was way better than Rick. Not even close.
-
Sounds like you got played like dawgs
-
-
Not if wins is the measure.RoadDawg55 said:Pete was way better than Rick. Not even close.
-
He is a student of the dismal science. What do you expect? A sunny disposition?Lawrence_of_a_Labia said:
You’ve never had compassion for nobody.MikeDamone said:So my neuheisal compassion is being proven out more every day.
Rick without the Rosebowl win.
Btw, brilliant fucking handle. Maybe the best I've seen on the boards ... ever. -
You got Michigan the first week and travel to SC, Oregon, Utah and Cal.YellowSnow said:
Looking ahead to the 247 composite 2020 rankings, there were only be 3 teams ahead of UW on the schedule in terms of overall talent: USC, Oregon and Michigan and if they are ranked higher then us it's only by a c-hair.creepycoug said:
Yup. There you have it.YellowSnow said:
Good analysis here Creep.creepycoug said:Of course, the problem with this stat is that, if you have talent like Washington has, your comparator group is going to be comprised of very good teams.
Conversely, when you don't have talent, you only need to beat teams that have more talent, but are not necessarily good themselves. Shit beats slightly less shit all the tim. It's a different thing to beat genuinely good teams.
I'm not apologizing for Toothy; and this stat can reveal coaches who underperform with what they have. But there's a reason Cuog is atop this poll and it's not all because of the Pirate. Cuog's comparator group is not a murderer's row, and he has that passing game that will allow him to beat some teams who may be better overall, but not necessarily elite or even very good.
The 5 wins were as follows...
2017 UCLA and Oregon (they were one spot higher than us in 247 composite that year)
2018 Stanford and UCLA
2019 USC
Not exactly murderer's row.
But, but, but we do more with less.
I hate the fucking saying. It's for losers.
Jimmy really needs to go 10-2 or better to instill a lot of confidence in the half brain segment of the fan base. I will tolerate 9-3 but won't be happy.
You should be tickled pink at 9-3. -
You really overrate a win against Purdue in the Rose Bowl. I can even except that 2000 was better than 2026, especially considering the Miami win. Pete’s 2017 and 2018 are better than any other Rick year.MikeDamone said:
Not if wins is the measure.RoadDawg55 said:Pete was way better than Rick. Not even close.
-
I don’t over rate a win over Purdue, I do value a rose bowl win. The rose bowl aside, their win percentages are similar.RoadDawg55 said:
You really overrate a win against Purdue in the Rose Bowl. I can even except that 2000 was better than 2026, especially considering the Miami win. Pete’s 2017 and 2018 are better than any other Rick year.MikeDamone said:
Not if wins is the measure.RoadDawg55 said:Pete was way better than Rick. Not even close.
You underrate losses to Cal, Stanford, ASU, Cal, Stanford, Oregon, Stanford, Colorado...
-
If wins are the measure and Petersen has more wins and a higher winning percentage, then are wins really the measure?MikeDamone said:
I don’t over rate a win over Purdue, I do value a rose bowl win. The rose bowl aside, their win percentages are similar.RoadDawg55 said:
You really overrate a win against Purdue in the Rose Bowl. I can even except that 2000 was better than 2026, especially considering the Miami win. Pete’s 2017 and 2018 are better than any other Rick year.MikeDamone said:
Not if wins is the measure.RoadDawg55 said:Pete was way better than Rick. Not even close.
You underrate losses to Cal, Stanford, ASU, Cal, Stanford, Oregon, Stanford, Colorado... -
I didn't say Rick was better than Peterson.FremontTroll said:
If wins are the measure and Petersen has more wins and a higher winning percentage, then are wins really the measure?MikeDamone said:
I don’t over rate a win over Purdue, I do value a rose bowl win. The rose bowl aside, their win percentages are similar.RoadDawg55 said:
You really overrate a win against Purdue in the Rose Bowl. I can even except that 2000 was better than 2026, especially considering the Miami win. Pete’s 2017 and 2018 are better than any other Rick year.MikeDamone said:
Not if wins is the measure.RoadDawg55 said:Pete was way better than Rick. Not even close.
You underrate losses to Cal, Stanford, ASU, Cal, Stanford, Oregon, Stanford, Colorado...
I said that Peterson isn't "way better".
Wining % difference isn't huge. .7 vs .67
Factor in a major bowl win and the difference is even less.
Yay yay. Purdue. So what? They beat who they had to. As for as fun goes... The Rick years were a kick as a fan. Peterson was more frustrating.
