Season ticket sales are up.
Comments
-
Staff? Did we just learn something about the word "cuntwaffle"; I hope not.IrishDawg22 said:
Says the guy with the username of a 16yr old.CuntWaffle said:
Pressing badly.IrishDawg22 said:
Poont & ya boi??? Did I see you testifying in the Trayvon case a couple of weeks ago???TheKobeStopper said:
You ignored the poont about Lockner.IrishDawg22 said:
Price mobile enough???? LMAOHe_Needs_More_Time said:
The first two years he had Locker and Locker ran less with Sark than with Ty. Price isn't a runner but is mobile enough.IrishDawg22 said:
Your right, KP was so mobile last year.
Have you ever watched a game???
Maybe I will add pics next time.
You also haven't seen Miles play. Lindquist and Williams are more running threats than Miles is.
I think he has -9 rushing yards for his career. He is a walking mash unit.
And thanks to a well timed business trip to Denver, I did get to see Cyler play. From what I observed, he is much more of a running threat than Price.
I personally can't wait for Miles to run for 500 yards in 1 season when Jack ran for 600 total in 2 seasons under ya boi Sark.
Actually it was 773 & 13 TDs.
Wait, I thought he ran way too much in Yr 1???
And if you can't make a sound argument, you can always wave the pro Sark flag!!!!!
Soooo weak BRO!!!!
Should I add a LOL so he understands??? -
Finishing 38th isn't top 30. Also the year prior with Jake we finished in the 60's.IrishDawg22 said:
And thanks for making my point. I said if we had a mobile QB we would finish Top 30 in rushing. In Jake's last year we were #38. Sorry, missed it by 8 spots.
Now say something clever to distract from the facts.
Notice in 2010 was the year UW was 3-6 and then Sark pounded Polk like crazy, also let Jake run more. UW then went 4-0. I was thinking maybe just maybe boy wonder had figured it out.
Then the next season? nope. -
The main problem with our lack of a running game is that we struggle to pass block?IrishDawg22 said:
And when was I defending Sark???? The discussion was about the lack of running game, when in fact it is our inability to protect the passer that was our main issue on offense.PurpleJ said:
Isn't it SARK'S job to recruit and develop that TALENT? Isn't it also his JOB to commit to having a solid GROUND game?IrishDawg22 said:
You leave out 1 key component to our rushing numbers. We had a QB that was absolutely no threat while running the spread option. Add in a mobile QB (Miles) and you can add 500 yds into that number which would put us near the Top 30 to go with our passing attack.PurpleJ said:
Look at our national ranking in rushing yards per game under Sark:IrishDawg22 said:"Once Sark decides to get out of his own way and commit to the run" - jecornel
If you are going to bitch, at least pretend you know something about football. The Dawgs have had 4 straight 1,000+ rushers. 1st time in program history I believe, but I could be wrong.
In today's game, you cannot just RUN the ball without a threat of a decent passing game.
The problem is we cannot RECRUIT athletic Oline guys and we have a position coach who does not understand, or at least cannot develop guys to PASS protect. For some reason Sark has chose to stand behind Cozz, and that has been his biggest mistake.
2012: 86th
2011: 63rd
2010: 38th (peaked)
2009: 68th
In comparison, Oregon was in the top 10 every year he has been here.
Source: cfbstats.com/2012/leader/national/team/offense/split01/category01/sort01.html
You are right about one thing. Cozz has done a shitty job and Sark kept him here, and recruits know that.
My main concern is still the lack of TALENT up front and their ability to protect the passer.
As for Sark's play calling, we that speaks for itself.
I can CAPITALIZE words in my POSTS, too.
Sorry that is a TOUGH concept for some IDIOTS to grasp.
The main problem with the offense is that our head coach has his head buried in the play sheet the entire game instead of actually watching what is occuring and looking directly at players, is extremely predictable with his play calling, panics and abandons the best working part of the offense once we get behind by 7 points, tries to get to cute with play calling, and coaches up a mentally weak offense. That is the main fucking problem with our offensive coordinator of a head coach. What is our/Sarks/UWs offensive identity? 1 yard loss WR bubble screen followed up by a running play? thats fucking it. Its not Cozz's fault (although he hasn't been great), its not Ivan's fault, its the fucking head coach pretending he is an offensive coordinators because he doesnt know how to do anything elses fault.
During Sark's tenure his rushing attempts per game averages are:
2009 Polk and Locker: 32.5 att/game (95th)
2010 Polk, Callier, and Locker: 37 att/game (56th)
2011 Polk, Callier, and Sankey: 34.8 att/game (80th)
2012 Sankey: 35.5 att/game (82nd)
Sark greatly under uses the run, especially when he had a running QB in Lockner and one of the best UW runningback in history in Polk.
In one post your blaming Cozz for the problem because he doesnt recruit better OL and in another you are making wild claims that we just need a mobile QB that could rush for 500 yards -
You took the words right out of my keyboard.Houhusky said:
The main problem with our lack of a running game is that we struggle to pass block?IrishDawg22 said:
And when was I defending Sark???? The discussion was about the lack of running game, when in fact it is our inability to protect the passer that was our main issue on offense.PurpleJ said:
Isn't it SARK'S job to recruit and develop that TALENT? Isn't it also his JOB to commit to having a solid GROUND game?IrishDawg22 said:
You leave out 1 key component to our rushing numbers. We had a QB that was absolutely no threat while running the spread option. Add in a mobile QB (Miles) and you can add 500 yds into that number which would put us near the Top 30 to go with our passing attack.PurpleJ said:
Look at our national ranking in rushing yards per game under Sark:IrishDawg22 said:"Once Sark decides to get out of his own way and commit to the run" - jecornel
If you are going to bitch, at least pretend you know something about football. The Dawgs have had 4 straight 1,000+ rushers. 1st time in program history I believe, but I could be wrong.
In today's game, you cannot just RUN the ball without a threat of a decent passing game.
The problem is we cannot RECRUIT athletic Oline guys and we have a position coach who does not understand, or at least cannot develop guys to PASS protect. For some reason Sark has chose to stand behind Cozz, and that has been his biggest mistake.
2012: 86th
2011: 63rd
2010: 38th (peaked)
2009: 68th
In comparison, Oregon was in the top 10 every year he has been here.
Source: cfbstats.com/2012/leader/national/team/offense/split01/category01/sort01.html
You are right about one thing. Cozz has done a shitty job and Sark kept him here, and recruits know that.
My main concern is still the lack of TALENT up front and their ability to protect the passer.
As for Sark's play calling, we that speaks for itself.
I can CAPITALIZE words in my POSTS, too.
Sorry that is a TOUGH concept for some IDIOTS to grasp.
The main problem with the offense is that our head coach has his head buried in the play sheet the entire game instead of actually watching what is occuring and looking directly at players, is extremely predictable with his play calling, panics and abandons the best working part of the offense once we get behind by 7 points, tries to get to cute with play calling, and coaches up a mentally weak offense. That is the main fucking problem with our offensive coordinator of a head coach. What is our/Sarks/UWs offensive identity? 1 yard loss WR bubble screen followed up by a running play? thats fucking it. Its not Cozz's fault (although he hasn't been great), its not Ivan's fault, its the fucking head coach pretending he is an offensive coordinators because he doesnt know how to do anything elses fault.
During Sark's tenure his rushing attempts per game averages are:
2009 Polk and Locker: 32.5 att/game (95th)
2010 Polk, Callier, and Locker: 37 att/game (56th)
2011 Polk, Callier, and Sankey: 34.8 att/game (80th)
2012 Sankey: 35.5 att/game (82nd)
3rd and short? Better call a pass play. Running is too "obvious".
-
The Oregon game in 2011 I was literally predicting every play call.
1st down: Play action pass for a sack
2nd and long: run the ball
3rd down: short pass
4th down: punt.
"Offensive genius". -
I miss Gilby's 50 yard sideways passes to the fullback. "Nobody covers the fullback!"
Our amps go up to 11 -
-
He_Needs_More_Time said:
The Oregon games in 2009, 2010, 2011, and 2012 I was literally predicting every play call.
1st down: Play action pass for a sack
2nd and long: run the ball
3rd down: short pass
4th down: punt.
"Offensive genius". -
Running a primary spread option offense with a one-legged QB who chucks the ball out of bounds at the first sign of trouble is just one example of why the "general" opinion among the uninformed masses that Sark is an offensive mastermind is complete horseshit.IrishDawg22 said:
You leave out 1 key component to our rushing numbers. We had a QB that was absolutely no threat while running the spread option. Add in a mobile QB (Miles) and you can add 500 yds into that number which would put us near the Top 30 to go with our passing attack.
My main concern is still the lack of TALENT up front and their ability to protect the passer.
As for Sark's play calling, we that speaks for itself.
-
When the fuck did you come over here? Did you say something to Kimberly that made him piss in your Cheerios?Dawgs4ever said:
Running a primary spread option offense with a one-legged QB who chucks the ball out of bounds at the first sign of trouble is just one example of why the "general" opinion among the uninformed masses that Sark is an offensive mastermind is complete horseshit.IrishDawg22 said:
You leave out 1 key component to our rushing numbers. We had a QB that was absolutely no threat while running the spread option. Add in a mobile QB (Miles) and you can add 500 yds into that number which would put us near the Top 30 to go with our passing attack.
My main concern is still the lack of TALENT up front and their ability to protect the passer.
As for Sark's play calling, we that speaks for itself. -
Long time lurker, first time poster.CheersWestDawg said:
When the fuck did you come over here? Did you say something to Kimberly that made him piss in your Cheerios?
Where's the best place to grab a meal before the game??
-
If you're going to be a Hardcore Husky devotee, the Ram in the U Village with the $15.99 all you can eat ribs with a Rickshaw ride to the game.
If you want to go back to Doogman, go to Dino's or the DubPub (known around here as he Double Penetration Pub) and blow Kim and Ektard for their bullshit Oregon and recruiting info. -
You forgot to mention that Jen with big tits will be working at the Double Penetration Pub.CheersWestDawg said:If you're going to be a Hardcore Husky devotee, the Ram in the U Village with the $15.99 all you can eat ribs with a Rickshaw ride to the game.
If you want to go back to Doogman, go to Dino's or the DubPub (known around here as he Double Penetration Pub) and blow Kim and Ektard for their bullshit Oregon and recruiting info. -
Now this I agree with.Dawgs4ever said:
Running a primary spread option offense with a one-legged QB who chucks the ball out of bounds at the first sign of trouble is just one example of why the "general" opinion among the uninformed masses that Sark is an offensive mastermind is complete horseshit.IrishDawg22 said:
You leave out 1 key component to our rushing numbers. We had a QB that was absolutely no threat while running the spread option. Add in a mobile QB (Miles) and you can add 500 yds into that number which would put us near the Top 30 to go with our passing attack.
My main concern is still the lack of TALENT up front and their ability to protect the passer.
As for Sark's play calling, we that speaks for itself.
Look ma', there is life on this planet.
![[Deleted User]](https://wb.vanillicon.com/b14605887e2b6b59902271a0095c9265_100.png)
