Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
Sub K "the #1 mistake we are making in recruiting"
Comments
-
Yet kept Bob Gregory, failed recruiter and allowed him to trott out Kyler Manu and stuck with him until late in the season. Let Bush continue to play Baciella, keep Puka on the bench, and bury Spiker on the depth chart.sonics1993 said:
Before Pete got here Washington was inherent problems. On paper, sure it’s easy to say Washington should win certain amount of games and conference titles but that’s not how it works. Just ask Texas, Miami or Florida State how difficult it is. Pete did a great job of building a winning culture and improving the roster talent every year. You are entitled to think whatever you like about Pete but I’m personally thankful he took this job.haie said:
What schools are you comparing us to?sonics1993 said:
I do feel like we were lucky to have as a head coach because it’s very hard to find a successful head coach in college especially when you compare the resources we have to other schools. As far as the fail thing, I don’t know how anyone could argue the Pete failed at Washington.haie said:
This wasn't a down year.sonics1993 said:
That “burnout” took us from 7-8 win seasons to 10+ wins and an appearance in a new year six bowl game for three straight years. One down year doesn’t erase that especially when that down year would have been considered a successful season before he got here. He raised the bar and if he was still here, I think he would have won one of those games. Problem is Jimmy doesn’t have a track record like Pete.haie said:
Yet you don't agree with criticizing the burnout that dropped the Rose Bowl and subsequently mailed in the 8 win season.sonics1993 said:What mostly matters in recruiting is winning, sending guys to the NFL and location. The problem with UW is they haven’t won any big games and are coming off a eight win season. Compare that to a school like Ohio State that is coming off a playoff appearance or Oregon who just won a Rose bowl. UW’s biggest obstacle right now is showing recruits that they aren’t on a down turn.
Favored by the metrics in every game but one, Oregon at home where we blow a two touchdown lead.
Pete decides before the apple cup (probably realizes his offense is such shit he could actually lose to Leach at home) that he's done at Washington, comes out and admits that he's been burned out since before the apple cup.
You act like we're so lucky to have him. He had a formula that could win 10 games with decent experience and yet he still lost to a lot of shit coaches: Graham, Helton (I don't believe for a second UW should have lost that game in 2016), Mora, Guy who just dipped out of Colorado, etc.
Still not over him starting at 8-6 and quitting after 8-5. Beat Oregon just twice. My God. You could argue that he failed at Washington.
Cal who doesn't give a shit? Beavlet and cuog who are poor, and will always be poor? Stanford who really doesn't give a fuck, UCLA who doesn't give a fuck?
Arizona who's poor and only cares about basketball? Utah that is mountain west shit?
Arizona State, Colorado? Meh. Inherent problems for both.
We're competing with SC who's a mess and Oregon, which is a backwater shit school and location. Oregon just so happens to really care, but that's about it.
Who should we be lucky to be better than with Pete?
3/6 seasons were mediocre. 2-4 against Oregon. 2-4 against Stanford. No major bowl wins. That's a pretty bad tenure all things considered.
His finest moment? Propogating a QB competition between Haener and Skinny. Lose, lose. Elite coaches don't take valuable reps from Skinny and consider starting Jake Haener. Jake Haener.
Sure, Pete bolstered the roster and gave good interview. He also finished tied for third in the weakest Pac12 in 50 years then quit. -
I think the QB battle was real. Eason’s a very flawed QB. Sure he has better talent, but maybe he really wasn’t much better than Haener. All Haener would have to be is an average to above average QB to be as good as Eason was.Baseman said:
Yet kept Bob Gregory, failed recruiter and allowed him to trott out Kyler Manu and stuck with him until late in the season. Let Bush continue to play Baciella, keep Puka on the bench, and bury Spiker on the depth chart.sonics1993 said:
Before Pete got here Washington was inherent problems. On paper, sure it’s easy to say Washington should win certain amount of games and conference titles but that’s not how it works. Just ask Texas, Miami or Florida State how difficult it is. Pete did a great job of building a winning culture and improving the roster talent every year. You are entitled to think whatever you like about Pete but I’m personally thankful he took this job.haie said:
What schools are you comparing us to?sonics1993 said:
I do feel like we were lucky to have as a head coach because it’s very hard to find a successful head coach in college especially when you compare the resources we have to other schools. As far as the fail thing, I don’t know how anyone could argue the Pete failed at Washington.haie said:
This wasn't a down year.sonics1993 said:
That “burnout” took us from 7-8 win seasons to 10+ wins and an appearance in a new year six bowl game for three straight years. One down year doesn’t erase that especially when that down year would have been considered a successful season before he got here. He raised the bar and if he was still here, I think he would have won one of those games. Problem is Jimmy doesn’t have a track record like Pete.haie said:
Yet you don't agree with criticizing the burnout that dropped the Rose Bowl and subsequently mailed in the 8 win season.sonics1993 said:What mostly matters in recruiting is winning, sending guys to the NFL and location. The problem with UW is they haven’t won any big games and are coming off a eight win season. Compare that to a school like Ohio State that is coming off a playoff appearance or Oregon who just won a Rose bowl. UW’s biggest obstacle right now is showing recruits that they aren’t on a down turn.
Favored by the metrics in every game but one, Oregon at home where we blow a two touchdown lead.
Pete decides before the apple cup (probably realizes his offense is such shit he could actually lose to Leach at home) that he's done at Washington, comes out and admits that he's been burned out since before the apple cup.
You act like we're so lucky to have him. He had a formula that could win 10 games with decent experience and yet he still lost to a lot of shit coaches: Graham, Helton (I don't believe for a second UW should have lost that game in 2016), Mora, Guy who just dipped out of Colorado, etc.
Still not over him starting at 8-6 and quitting after 8-5. Beat Oregon just twice. My God. You could argue that he failed at Washington.
Cal who doesn't give a shit? Beavlet and cuog who are poor, and will always be poor? Stanford who really doesn't give a fuck, UCLA who doesn't give a fuck?
Arizona who's poor and only cares about basketball? Utah that is mountain west shit?
Arizona State, Colorado? Meh. Inherent problems for both.
We're competing with SC who's a mess and Oregon, which is a backwater shit school and location. Oregon just so happens to really care, but that's about it.
Who should we be lucky to be better than with Pete?
3/6 seasons were mediocre. 2-4 against Oregon. 2-4 against Stanford. No major bowl wins. That's a pretty bad tenure all things considered.
His finest moment? Propogating a QB competition between Haener and Skinny. Lose, lose. Elite coaches don't take valuable reps from Skinny and consider starting Jake Haener. Jake Haener.
Sure, Pete bolstered the roster and gave good interview. He also finished tied for third in the weakest Pac12 in 50 years then quit.
The reps excuse is lame. Other schools besides UW have QB battles and their QB’s play well.
Eason was at UW for a year and a half by the time he took a snap. He had plenty of time to develop a rhythm with WR’s. Who are you guys specifically talking about? I remember Spiker being one. He probably threw to Spiker a ton of scout teams, with the back ups, etc. Same for Bynum, someone he did have chemistry with. -
From what I heard, Eason wasn’t much of a practice player. If we know anything about Pete it’s at how much he values practice. We will see what he does in the NFL but I suspect that he will bust.
-
The problem that SubK and most of the others that want to bitch about everything crew has is really two fold.
First, they bitch about EVERYTHING and most of them rarely have solutions to what they are bitching about. It doesn’t come off often when something positive is done and it is celebrated. For people that say they want the best for Washington, their take is accentuating the negative way too often.
Second, there is often a massive disconnect between what they want done vs reality. Sure, we can all see that Bob Gregory has his limitations. There’s also financial constraints that we have to work between. Firing coaches and paying buyouts isn’t a snap the finger thing. There are consequences and they need to be considered.
There’s good insight in there ... but it’s often lost in the negativity. -
I’m truly gutted and feel sick to my stomach reading this.
So much bullying in this thread. Also racism.
I'd like the record to show that I am STANDING UP to bullying. And the racism.
-
I feel like we should all snap our fingers like it’s a hipster poetry slam now or some shit.dnc said:I’m truly gutted and feel sick to my stomach reading this.
So much bullying in this thread. Also racism.
I'd like the record to show that I am STANDING UP to bullying. And the racism. -
If yore just hear to bash cherry blossoms, you won’t lassed long.dirtysouwfdawg said:I don’t like cherry blossoms but this video gave me goose bumps. Not like the are you afraid of the dark type ones either.
-
"Cherry blossom is now in full bloom"guntlove said:
If yore just hear to bash cherry blossoms, you won’t lassed long.dirtysouwfdawg said:I don’t like cherry blossoms but this video gave me goose bumps. Not like the are you afraid of the dark type ones either.
-
QB competitions work with multiple quality prospects, which Jake Haener was not. Power 5 Teams --good ones anyway -- don't recruit Haenerseque QBs. He didn't belong on the roster yet Pete considered starting him. Given the chance, he shit his pants. Immobile sub 6 footers don't get second chances.RoadDawg55 said:
I think the QB battle was real. Eason’s a very flawed QB. Sure he has better talent, but maybe he really wasn’t much better than Haener. All Haener would have to be is an average to above average QB to be as good as Eason was.Baseman said:
Yet kept Bob Gregory, failed recruiter and allowed him to trott out Kyler Manu and stuck with him until late in the season. Let Bush continue to play Baciella, keep Puka on the bench, and bury Spiker on the depth chart.sonics1993 said:
Before Pete got here Washington was inherent problems. On paper, sure it’s easy to say Washington should win certain amount of games and conference titles but that’s not how it works. Just ask Texas, Miami or Florida State how difficult it is. Pete did a great job of building a winning culture and improving the roster talent every year. You are entitled to think whatever you like about Pete but I’m personally thankful he took this job.haie said:
What schools are you comparing us to?sonics1993 said:
I do feel like we were lucky to have as a head coach because it’s very hard to find a successful head coach in college especially when you compare the resources we have to other schools. As far as the fail thing, I don’t know how anyone could argue the Pete failed at Washington.haie said:
This wasn't a down year.sonics1993 said:
That “burnout” took us from 7-8 win seasons to 10+ wins and an appearance in a new year six bowl game for three straight years. One down year doesn’t erase that especially when that down year would have been considered a successful season before he got here. He raised the bar and if he was still here, I think he would have won one of those games. Problem is Jimmy doesn’t have a track record like Pete.haie said:
Yet you don't agree with criticizing the burnout that dropped the Rose Bowl and subsequently mailed in the 8 win season.sonics1993 said:What mostly matters in recruiting is winning, sending guys to the NFL and location. The problem with UW is they haven’t won any big games and are coming off a eight win season. Compare that to a school like Ohio State that is coming off a playoff appearance or Oregon who just won a Rose bowl. UW’s biggest obstacle right now is showing recruits that they aren’t on a down turn.
Favored by the metrics in every game but one, Oregon at home where we blow a two touchdown lead.
Pete decides before the apple cup (probably realizes his offense is such shit he could actually lose to Leach at home) that he's done at Washington, comes out and admits that he's been burned out since before the apple cup.
You act like we're so lucky to have him. He had a formula that could win 10 games with decent experience and yet he still lost to a lot of shit coaches: Graham, Helton (I don't believe for a second UW should have lost that game in 2016), Mora, Guy who just dipped out of Colorado, etc.
Still not over him starting at 8-6 and quitting after 8-5. Beat Oregon just twice. My God. You could argue that he failed at Washington.
Cal who doesn't give a shit? Beavlet and cuog who are poor, and will always be poor? Stanford who really doesn't give a fuck, UCLA who doesn't give a fuck?
Arizona who's poor and only cares about basketball? Utah that is mountain west shit?
Arizona State, Colorado? Meh. Inherent problems for both.
We're competing with SC who's a mess and Oregon, which is a backwater shit school and location. Oregon just so happens to really care, but that's about it.
Who should we be lucky to be better than with Pete?
3/6 seasons were mediocre. 2-4 against Oregon. 2-4 against Stanford. No major bowl wins. That's a pretty bad tenure all things considered.
His finest moment? Propogating a QB competition between Haener and Skinny. Lose, lose. Elite coaches don't take valuable reps from Skinny and consider starting Jake Haener. Jake Haener.
Sure, Pete bolstered the roster and gave good interview. He also finished tied for third in the weakest Pac12 in 50 years then quit.
The reps excuse is lame. Other schools besides UW have QB battles and their QB’s play well.
Eason was at UW for a year and a half by the time he took a snap. He had plenty of time to develop a rhythm with WR’s. Who are you guys specifically talking about? I remember Spiker being one. He probably threw to Spiker a ton of scout teams, with the back ups, etc. Same for Bynum, someone he did have chemistry with.
Playing Fuller and Baciella over Puka, Bynum, and Spiker handicapped Skinny. He's better than given credit for.
-
Eason isn’t that good. He wasn’t good at Georgia either. I agree that Haener shit his pants and probably sucked. There was a reason for a competition tho.Baseman said:
QB competitions work with multiple quality prospects, which Jake Haener was not. Power 5 Teams --good ones anyway -- don't recruit Haenerseque QBs. He didn't belong on the roster yet Pete considered starting him. Given the chance, he shit his pants. Immobile sub 6 footers don't get second chances.RoadDawg55 said:
I think the QB battle was real. Eason’s a very flawed QB. Sure he has better talent, but maybe he really wasn’t much better than Haener. All Haener would have to be is an average to above average QB to be as good as Eason was.Baseman said:
Yet kept Bob Gregory, failed recruiter and allowed him to trott out Kyler Manu and stuck with him until late in the season. Let Bush continue to play Baciella, keep Puka on the bench, and bury Spiker on the depth chart.sonics1993 said:
Before Pete got here Washington was inherent problems. On paper, sure it’s easy to say Washington should win certain amount of games and conference titles but that’s not how it works. Just ask Texas, Miami or Florida State how difficult it is. Pete did a great job of building a winning culture and improving the roster talent every year. You are entitled to think whatever you like about Pete but I’m personally thankful he took this job.haie said:
What schools are you comparing us to?sonics1993 said:
I do feel like we were lucky to have as a head coach because it’s very hard to find a successful head coach in college especially when you compare the resources we have to other schools. As far as the fail thing, I don’t know how anyone could argue the Pete failed at Washington.haie said:
This wasn't a down year.sonics1993 said:
That “burnout” took us from 7-8 win seasons to 10+ wins and an appearance in a new year six bowl game for three straight years. One down year doesn’t erase that especially when that down year would have been considered a successful season before he got here. He raised the bar and if he was still here, I think he would have won one of those games. Problem is Jimmy doesn’t have a track record like Pete.haie said:
Yet you don't agree with criticizing the burnout that dropped the Rose Bowl and subsequently mailed in the 8 win season.sonics1993 said:What mostly matters in recruiting is winning, sending guys to the NFL and location. The problem with UW is they haven’t won any big games and are coming off a eight win season. Compare that to a school like Ohio State that is coming off a playoff appearance or Oregon who just won a Rose bowl. UW’s biggest obstacle right now is showing recruits that they aren’t on a down turn.
Favored by the metrics in every game but one, Oregon at home where we blow a two touchdown lead.
Pete decides before the apple cup (probably realizes his offense is such shit he could actually lose to Leach at home) that he's done at Washington, comes out and admits that he's been burned out since before the apple cup.
You act like we're so lucky to have him. He had a formula that could win 10 games with decent experience and yet he still lost to a lot of shit coaches: Graham, Helton (I don't believe for a second UW should have lost that game in 2016), Mora, Guy who just dipped out of Colorado, etc.
Still not over him starting at 8-6 and quitting after 8-5. Beat Oregon just twice. My God. You could argue that he failed at Washington.
Cal who doesn't give a shit? Beavlet and cuog who are poor, and will always be poor? Stanford who really doesn't give a fuck, UCLA who doesn't give a fuck?
Arizona who's poor and only cares about basketball? Utah that is mountain west shit?
Arizona State, Colorado? Meh. Inherent problems for both.
We're competing with SC who's a mess and Oregon, which is a backwater shit school and location. Oregon just so happens to really care, but that's about it.
Who should we be lucky to be better than with Pete?
3/6 seasons were mediocre. 2-4 against Oregon. 2-4 against Stanford. No major bowl wins. That's a pretty bad tenure all things considered.
His finest moment? Propogating a QB competition between Haener and Skinny. Lose, lose. Elite coaches don't take valuable reps from Skinny and consider starting Jake Haener. Jake Haener.
Sure, Pete bolstered the roster and gave good interview. He also finished tied for third in the weakest Pac12 in 50 years then quit.
The reps excuse is lame. Other schools besides UW have QB battles and their QB’s play well.
Eason was at UW for a year and a half by the time he took a snap. He had plenty of time to develop a rhythm with WR’s. Who are you guys specifically talking about? I remember Spiker being one. He probably threw to Spiker a ton of scout teams, with the back ups, etc. Same for Bynum, someone he did have chemistry with.
Playing Fuller and Baciella over Puka, Bynum, and Spiker handicapped Skinny. He's better than given credit for.
If Eason would have played better, it wouldn’t have been, but as you saw in actual games, he’s inconsistent with some major flaws.
You guys didn’t have 1/4 of the patience for Browning an you did for Eason. Enough with the excuses. He wasn’t that good. It’s okay.
