Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
Your final grade for Sark?
BabsGilbyTawdTy
Member Posts: 1,058
Since maybe the smoke has cleared a little since his departure to USC, I'd like to see how folks here would grade Steve Sarkisian's time in charge of our beloved UW Football program from December 8, 2008 to December 2, 2013.
B-minus
No real indication Sark was figuring shit out and the program was headed to the upper echelon of the conference.
B-minus
No real indication Sark was figuring shit out and the program was headed to the upper echelon of the conference.
Comments
Just because Ty and Boobs were fucking Fs doesn't elevate a MEDIOCRE coach.
The more I think about it (and listen to fucksticks on here), 2009 was mostly a coach bounce. His true colors started to show with the 3-6 start in 2010. I should have listened to @DerekJohnson and @whlinder .
He recrooooted pretty well, but player development, general discipline, and playcalling were average if that. We can and finally did get better.
He could have been a solid B or B+ with effort ... Fucker was lazy and selfish.
C+
A C as a coach and recruiter.
The + is for at least having a good time at Joey's.
Special Teams were always bad. If the offense was good then the defense sucked, if defense was good then offense sucked.
As a recruiter he was okay. Didn't sign one 4 star OL since his 2010 class.
His teams could never rise up on the road against a decent team, often plunger raped.
Took 6th place in year 5 which had everyone returning. Nuff said.
He was a B recruiter, a D game day coach, and a C developer.
There's no excuse for the Washington coach to be anything but an A in all of the above. I'm pretty sure we will see A level performance in all three aspects for the next few years and everyone is going to say "I told you not to sleep on Pete!"
First of all, he was not a B recruiter. He was a B recruiter at getting the guys he wanted (maybe even a B+), but he was below average at identifying who to put his efforts into. The in state and OL recruiting neglect were inexcusable. Overall he's maybe a C+ recruiter.
His overall coaching probably was around a D+. He won more conference games than he lost (barely), but only thanks to the presence of Colorado and Utah - his conference performance was average, at best. And he wasn't coaching a dreck school, he was coaching at WASHINGTON, dammit, where an average coach should get above average results. Outside of recruiting he's below average at everything that matters - discipline, player development, decision making, prioritizing.
He's lucky he had owen12 to prop him up and give everyone the illusion he had accomplished something.
WDWHA
He did bring the program from unparalleled depths (6 years of worthlessness) but failed to elevate the program to where it should be. He lead us to some great wins and some mind-numbing losses. He did leave the program in great shape for Petersen, so that's a bonus.
C
Perfect example of the Peter Principle.
Sark is the greatest coach to ever grace the sidelines of Husky Stadium. It's a shame that an unproven coach will now be given credit for the foundation he set and the personal sacrifice he made for UW.
As Sark returns USC to Carroll'esque glory, HHB's will regret the day they drove him away. The crime in all this is that they will never be held accountable for the permanent damage they've caused the program as they hid behind their anonymity.