UW's Vegas Bowl Debacle: Sarkisian Crapping out as Husky Coach
Comments
-
Expectations in years 1-4 were different because of 2004-2008. Not saying I agree with them.ACSlaterDawg said:
If expectations were higher, Sark's ass would either be on fire now or he would be Door.Ass.Out. already.
2013 is now the time where expectations are back to 80s and 90s levels.
Whose expectations? If the AD doesn't have those expectations, Sark is going nowhere if he wins 6 or 7 next year. In fact, I would say fans who have expectations back to 90s levels are in the minority.
-
I can't help but notice that 100% of the people who express grave concern over me losing credibility as a writer are also anti-Mora.
And as KIm Grinolds told his subscribers in Nov 2010.... "Derek lost a lot of credibility when he started criticizing Steve Sarkisian." -
You lost credibility as a writer when you got all bitter and political.
-
ACSlaterDawg said:
Sark won't be fired because the 2012-2013 teams will have enough talent to win 8-9 games. It's totally unrealistic that hes fired. Also, the HHB crowd isn't aware that expectations are much higher. Most fans are upset about 7-6 three years in a row. Sark's seat will get really hot if he doesn't win 9 games next year.
.
Kim says he knows Woody and you don't and you are a moron if you think Sark's seat is even warm. Quit stomping your feet. -
Who do you see UW beating next year to get to 9 wins?Fire_Marshall_Bill said:
I pretty much agree with all that Slater, except I didn't want Mora badly in '07...I mainly just wanted Ty gone.ACSlaterDawg said:I agree with the criticisms of Sark but don't agree with the conclusion and especially the part about Mora. I wanted Mora badly in 2007. But thats over. Tonight is his second blowout against a mediocre opponent. Derek you are a great writer so please put aside your bias.Mora is no Chip.
Some great posts here on the 4th and 1. He had 3 TO's so definitely should have challenged, though one poster correctly pointed out that the guy who made the call was the only guy with the good angle on the play. And no BSU was not dicked on the 3rd down play. The guy caught the ball with his back to the line. The ball was clearly short.
The other huge management snafu was not calling TO after the 2nd to last play. Call TO so you have 30 seconds left. Instead, they let the clock run 10 seconds and then waste a down! The lack of time is why Price forced that throw. Otherwise he would have checked down or threw it out of bounds.
Sark won't be fired because the 2012-2013 teams will have enough talent to win 8-9 games. It's totally unrealistic that hes fired. Also, the HHB crowd isn't aware that expectations are much higher. Most fans are upset about 7-6 three years in a row. Sark's seat will get really hot if he doesn't win 9 games next year.
Clearly coaches on the Carroll tree have a big problem with discipline and keeping their teams motivated. This is Sark's biggest shortcoming as everyone now knows it. He needs to figure this out.
UW will improve because of better talent but Sark has shown no reason to believe he is a championship coach. That is the problem. With USC down, sanctions coming from UO, the next few years are a golden opportunity to place us back in the top 3 consistently. Unfortunately, Sark is not the guy who can take advantage. He'll be good enough not to get fired.
As of now, it seems like nine wins is about his ceiling. And 9-4 isn't a bad season, but it shouldn't be anywhere near the ceiling. I can see them going 9-4 or maybe blowing a game vs. an inferior team and ending up 8-5 next year, Sark staying, and in 2014, they'll win six or seven, and the excuse will be injuries, youth, schedule, or any combination of those three.
Non-conference is probably 3-0
They miss USC and Colorado.
They play at either UCLA or ASU and get the other at home. Neither game at home is a gimme. 1-1 between those 2 teams.
Oregon and Stanford = 0-2
Oregon St and Utah on the road = 1-1
Arizona, Cal and WSU at home = 3-0
That's 8-4 before a bowl and being optimistic. Sark shits the bed at least once per season since he's been here so 7-5 is much likely before a bowl game.
-
Steve is a train wreck.....more people understand this than you might suspect. It's been pretty obvious since last year. (OR St and Alamo Bowl.)
The pandering noise generated by Kim Grinolds and his groupies on DawgBoy may lead you to believe otherwise. -
It's been pretty obvious since 2009Steve_Bowman said:Steve is a train wreck.....more people understand this than you might suspect. It's been pretty obvious since last year. (OR St and Alamo Bowl.)
The pandering noise generated by Kim Grinolds and his groupies on DawgBoy may lead you to believe otherwise. -
I had high hopes after the USC game only to see the real Sark appear. Absoluting ridiculous losing to UCLA and not continuing to give the ball to Polk who was running very well. I'm sure there are other good examples of his inability to coach from that year but the UCLA game is one that sticks in my mind very clearly.DerekJohnson said:
It's been pretty obvious since 2009Steve_Bowman said:Steve is a train wreck.....more people understand this than you might suspect. It's been pretty obvious since last year. (OR St and Alamo Bowl.)
The pandering noise generated by Kim Grinolds and his groupies on DawgBoy may lead you to believe otherwise.
-
DerekJohnson said:
It's been pretty obvious since 2009Steve_Bowman said:Steve is a train wreck.....more people understand this than you might suspect. It's been pretty obvious since last year. (OR St and Alamo Bowl.)
The pandering noise generated by Kim Grinolds and his groupies on DawgBoy may lead you to believe otherwise.
Not sure I agree that it's been obvious since 2009. The hire was uninspiring, that's for sure. But, the game against LSU showed remarkable improvement, as did beating USC. Things got ugly from there, but they finished strong with an impressive thrashing of Cal. 2009 was a mixed bag, but ended on a high note, it actually looked like they might finally start turning the corner.
2010 was more of the same, up and down, inconsistent play. IMO, this is when doubt really started creeping in. Again though, they finished strong, got into and won a bowl game. They ended on another high note, but the inconsistency was very troubling.
2011 more inconsistency. Offense looked good, defense was pathetic. Another winning season and a bowl game, but an extremely poor performance from the defense. Impressive post season changes to the defensive staff, but still, the inconsistency and game day brain farts were cause for major concern.
2012, wow. The defense improves, but the offense looks like shit and the team gets boat raced on the road. Discipline is lacking, as is focus and toughness. Not good.
Anyway, just my 0.02, but I don't think it was obvious in 2009. -
Southerndawg said:DerekJohnson said:
It's been pretty obvious since 2009Steve_Bowman said:Steve is a train wreck.....more people understand this than you might suspect. It's been pretty obvious since last year. (OR St and Alamo Bowl.)
The pandering noise generated by Kim Grinolds and his groupies on DawgBoy may lead you to believe otherwise.
Not sure I agree that it's been obvious since 2009. The hire was uninspiring, that's for sure. But, the game against LSU showed remarkable improvement, as did beating USC. Things got ugly from there, but they finished strong with an impressive thrashing of Cal. 2009 was a mixed bag, but ended on a high note, it actually looked like they might finally start turning the corner.
2010 was more of the same, up and down, inconsistent play. IMO, this is when doubt really started creeping in. Again though, they finished strong, got into and won a bowl game. They ended on another high note, but the inconsistency was very troubling.
2011 more inconsistency. Offense looked good, defense was pathetic. Another winning season and a bowl game, but an extremely poor performance from the defense. Impressive post season changes to the defensive staff, but still, the inconsistency and game day brain farts were cause for major concern.
2012, wow. The defense improves, but the offense looks like shit and the team gets boat raced on the road. Discipline is lacking, as is focus and toughness. Not good.
Anyway, just my 0.02, but I don't think it was obvious in 2009.
You're right, obvious is the wrong word. Because after the '09 Cal game I WAS on a little high. The better description is that "the warning signs were clearly there for anyone willing to acknowledge them." The UCLA and ASU games in particular were blown by the coaching staff and those (among other examples like Sark's ongoing and foolish braggadocio) got stuck in my craw and never left. -
Ya, I agree with that. Throw in the Notre Dame game that season as another one Sark blew ... with a little foolish braggadocio. I mean, how many fucking times in a row did he run it into a brick wall on the goal line?DerekJohnson said:Southerndawg said:DerekJohnson said:
It's been pretty obvious since 2009Steve_Bowman said:Steve is a train wreck.....more people understand this than you might suspect. It's been pretty obvious since last year. (OR St and Alamo Bowl.)
The pandering noise generated by Kim Grinolds and his groupies on DawgBoy may lead you to believe otherwise.
Not sure I agree that it's been obvious since 2009. The hire was uninspiring, that's for sure. But, the game against LSU showed remarkable improvement, as did beating USC. Things got ugly from there, but they finished strong with an impressive thrashing of Cal. 2009 was a mixed bag, but ended on a high note, it actually looked like they might finally start turning the corner.
2010 was more of the same, up and down, inconsistent play. IMO, this is when doubt really started creeping in. Again though, they finished strong, got into and won a bowl game. They ended on another high note, but the inconsistency was very troubling.
2011 more inconsistency. Offense looked good, defense was pathetic. Another winning season and a bowl game, but an extremely poor performance from the defense. Impressive post season changes to the defensive staff, but still, the inconsistency and game day brain farts were cause for major concern.
2012, wow. The defense improves, but the offense looks like shit and the team gets boat raced on the road. Discipline is lacking, as is focus and toughness. Not good.
Anyway, just my 0.02, but I don't think it was obvious in 2009.
You're right, obvious is the wrong word. Because after the '09 Cal game I WAS on a little high. The better description is that "the warning signs were clearly there for anyone willing to acknowledge them." The UCLA and ASU games in particular were blown by the coaching staff and those (among other examples like Sark's ongoing and foolish braggadocio) got stuck in my craw and never left.
Bottom line, the team should be showing up ready to play in every game and those kind of game day coaching mistakes should be gone by now, but they aren't and that doesn't bode well for the Huskies or Mr. Sarkisian for that matter.
BTW, nice use of braggadocio. Are we warming up for another book? LOL -
Isn't braggadocio a Pool Boy word?Southerndawg said:
Ya, I agree with that. Throw in the Notre Dame game that season as another one Sark blew ... with a little foolish braggadocio. I mean, how many fucking times in a row did he run it into a brick wall on the goal line?DerekJohnson said:Southerndawg said:DerekJohnson said:
It's been pretty obvious since 2009Steve_Bowman said:Steve is a train wreck.....more people understand this than you might suspect. It's been pretty obvious since last year. (OR St and Alamo Bowl.)
The pandering noise generated by Kim Grinolds and his groupies on DawgBoy may lead you to believe otherwise.
Not sure I agree that it's been obvious since 2009. The hire was uninspiring, that's for sure. But, the game against LSU showed remarkable improvement, as did beating USC. Things got ugly from there, but they finished strong with an impressive thrashing of Cal. 2009 was a mixed bag, but ended on a high note, it actually looked like they might finally start turning the corner.
2010 was more of the same, up and down, inconsistent play. IMO, this is when doubt really started creeping in. Again though, they finished strong, got into and won a bowl game. They ended on another high note, but the inconsistency was very troubling.
2011 more inconsistency. Offense looked good, defense was pathetic. Another winning season and a bowl game, but an extremely poor performance from the defense. Impressive post season changes to the defensive staff, but still, the inconsistency and game day brain farts were cause for major concern.
2012, wow. The defense improves, but the offense looks like shit and the team gets boat raced on the road. Discipline is lacking, as is focus and toughness. Not good.
Anyway, just my 0.02, but I don't think it was obvious in 2009.
You're right, obvious is the wrong word. Because after the '09 Cal game I WAS on a little high. The better description is that "the warning signs were clearly there for anyone willing to acknowledge them." The UCLA and ASU games in particular were blown by the coaching staff and those (among other examples like Sark's ongoing and foolish braggadocio) got stuck in my craw and never left.
Bottom line, the team should be showing up ready to play in every game and those kind of game day coaching mistakes should be gone by now, but they aren't and that doesn't bode well for the Huskies or Mr. Sarkisian for that matter.
BTW, nice use of braggadocio. Are we warming up for another book? LOL -
I don't know, but that would be fitting.CFetters_Nacho_Lover said:
Isn't braggadocio a Pool Boy word?Southerndawg said:
Ya, I agree with that. Throw in the Notre Dame game that season as another one Sark blew ... with a little foolish braggadocio. I mean, how many fucking times in a row did he run it into a brick wall on the goal line?DerekJohnson said:Southerndawg said:DerekJohnson said:
It's been pretty obvious since 2009Steve_Bowman said:Steve is a train wreck.....more people understand this than you might suspect. It's been pretty obvious since last year. (OR St and Alamo Bowl.)
The pandering noise generated by Kim Grinolds and his groupies on DawgBoy may lead you to believe otherwise.
Not sure I agree that it's been obvious since 2009. The hire was uninspiring, that's for sure. But, the game against LSU showed remarkable improvement, as did beating USC. Things got ugly from there, but they finished strong with an impressive thrashing of Cal. 2009 was a mixed bag, but ended on a high note, it actually looked like they might finally start turning the corner.
2010 was more of the same, up and down, inconsistent play. IMO, this is when doubt really started creeping in. Again though, they finished strong, got into and won a bowl game. They ended on another high note, but the inconsistency was very troubling.
2011 more inconsistency. Offense looked good, defense was pathetic. Another winning season and a bowl game, but an extremely poor performance from the defense. Impressive post season changes to the defensive staff, but still, the inconsistency and game day brain farts were cause for major concern.
2012, wow. The defense improves, but the offense looks like shit and the team gets boat raced on the road. Discipline is lacking, as is focus and toughness. Not good.
Anyway, just my 0.02, but I don't think it was obvious in 2009.
You're right, obvious is the wrong word. Because after the '09 Cal game I WAS on a little high. The better description is that "the warning signs were clearly there for anyone willing to acknowledge them." The UCLA and ASU games in particular were blown by the coaching staff and those (among other examples like Sark's ongoing and foolish braggadocio) got stuck in my craw and never left.
Bottom line, the team should be showing up ready to play in every game and those kind of game day coaching mistakes should be gone by now, but they aren't and that doesn't bode well for the Huskies or Mr. Sarkisian for that matter.
BTW, nice use of braggadocio. Are we warming up for another book? LOL
-
Derek has an agenda by the way
-
They've all received the Kim Grinolds memo.RaceBannon said:Derek has an agenda by the way
