Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
UW practices according to a buddy
Comments
-
I've had this argument over and over saying UW is a football school only to be told "James left over 20 years ago".
You define a football school as one that has had success over time and different coaches. Alabama didn't stop being a football school when they had shitty coaching and were .500.
This is literally the first hire I've liked since James.
We'll be back though it could take a couple years to get his systems going.Tequilla said:The UW program was strong before Don James ... it was strong after Don James ... the program is the program before and after Chris Petersen.
Great coaching + UW resources = Championships.
The program is what makes it all possible. -
I've been busy and away most of the time lately, but this is as good a thread as there is talking Husky football. Sadly conversations like this one are not welcome over there. The cat and mouse game we had to play when Sark left and Pete was hired was very telling. And then the chat conversations where we had to walk on egg shells if the pro Sark moderator Kim was in the room was funny. Some of us thought we would get the boot for expressing the truth about 3DB. Anyway, it's good to see honest expressions that are not done under duress.
-
Talent has never been an issue for Sark though. At Washington he constantly lost to teams who Washington was out recruiting.CFetters_Nacho_Lover said:Who in the south after UCLA has the talent that USC has? We all know Sark won't do much to develop it but there's less developing for him to do. I can see a 9-3 or 10-2 regular season within the next 3 years that wins the south for USC.
Sark can then have that added under the championships tab on his website.
Also the sanctions will start to hurt the program. UW had sanction recruiting classes in 1994 and 1995 those fifth year classes were 1998 and 1999 which went 6-6 and 7-5. Also very few guys were drafted which back then was unheard of for Washington.
I also agree with Road Dawg that USC will have a rough year this year going 8-5 if not 7-6. Unlike up here the heat will be turned up on Sark after year one. He has shown in the past when facing adversity he becomes a whiny bitch and unlike up here the media won't let him get away with it down there.
Also remember due to the LA's always having to play the northern Cal schools in 2015-2016 USC will be skipping WSU and Oregon State while playing UW and Oregon instead. In that same window conversely UCLA will be playing Oregon State and WSU instead of UW and Oregon.
I really don't see Sark winning the South unless the South is a down year and he wins with a 6-3 conference record. I think Mora will crush him, I think Graham at ASU will have a better program and I think Rich Rod will be just like how Mike Leach is in the North where he won't ever win it(Sorry PGOS) but he'll be annoying. I can see Rich Rod upsetting Sark at home. -
Thing with the South is that 7-2 will win it most years. Arizona, Colorado, and Utah are never really that serious about football.
-
Who did Sark "constantly" lose to who he out-recruited? We've established that he was a pretty ordinary recruiter. The games I can think of are OSU 2011 and Boise & WSU in 2012. Even saying sometimes is a stretch because Sark was good at beating the teams he should. His problem was he was a total front runner.
At USC he's going to have top 10 talent, so reasonably we could assume he will have top 20 teams. Their defense is going to be very good under Wilcox. Before Wilcox UW's defense yards per play nationally was 108-68-102. Following that UW was 48th in 2012 and 20th in 2013.
Now the sanctions and schedule especially are very good points. When will the sanctions hurt them most? Is it now? The next two years?
I would think by years 3-4 USC under this staff will solidly be a top 15 team just based on talent and competent defensive coaching. However, maybe after struggles the first two seasons, they'll need to be top 10 or top 5 to keep their jobs.
I still say that its a bit of a stretch to say USC won't win the South at least once while Sark is there. ASU will be rebuilding. Arizona is only a mild threat. UCLA is the only real competition and they'll need to replace Hundley after next year. As long as Mora is there I do think they will win the South most years. -
They average a better coach too.HeretoBeatmyChest said:
You don't think USC will win the South at least once in the next 3-4 years? They average a conference title every 2.5 years.He_Needs_More_Time said:
I don't see it. Sark isn't beating Mora and he'll drop some road games to teams less talented.HeretoBeatmyChest said:Re: Petersen and Sark, there is a reasonable chance these two will meet in a pac-12 title game at somepoint and Sark's job could be on the line. Think 2016.
-
Chest agenda towards Wilcox is as bad as Kim towards Sark.
UW consistently out recruits the AZ schools yet he's 3-5 against them and 0-4 on the road.
This Wilcox myth continues to live on. His defense never did shit against a good offense. Same with Tennessee as they got worse under him than previous coach. -
There is a bit of a Ty effect going on. Sark replaces dogshit Ty, doesn't look extremely indept, and people overblow his accomplishments. Wilcox replaces dogshit Holt, LRR.
-
Sark is not winning the south. Ever.
I'd put $1000 on dat -
great thread - football talk. love it. by the way, how many more months is spring practice on for?
![[Deleted User]](https://wb.vanillicon.com/b14605887e2b6b59902271a0095c9265_100.png)
