Another Stellar Incoming OLine Class

He_Needs_More_Time said:

HeretoBeatmyChest said:

Global said:

RoadDawg55 said:

Cozzetto sucks, and it's not even a debate. The last good OL he coached was at ASU in the late 90's. High school recruits were infants and toddlers the last time Cozzetto coached a good OL. That's not an opinion, that's a fact. Having said that, he is not the reason we don't get good OL recruits, Sark is.

Of course, Sark would like to get good OL recruits, but is there any doubt he enjoys recruiting a good QB or WR more than the OL? Don't you think we would have more good OL if Sark personally recruited them and made them know how badly we needed them? Instead, he pawns off the in state guys from 2012 on Cox who fucks it up, and becomes the scapegoat for who is actually responsible for fucking up, the guy in charge, Sark.

Very true. The writing is on the wall.

As SouthernDawg notes, I am big proponent of coaching stability, and against the "coaching carousel" mentality. Coaching stability was a factor in DJ's success, and more recently in Oregon's success. But it depends on having good coaches in place to begin with. In response to SouthernDawg, it is true that for years I have argued in favor of coaching stability, and that lead to me being supportive of coaches who did not deserve support. What i have said also is that (as in the case of Sark and as became the case with Willingham), they should be judged by teams composed of their own recruits who have been coached through their system. I know that there are times when a new coach will have success with the previous team's recruits, but the measure of whether a coach is suitable for longer term -- i.e., whether he can be the guy for coaching stability -- is how his teams do in year's 4-5 when his recruits become upperclassmen trained in his system. I was wrong to support a last year for Willingham, and I said so at the time, but I did support him for the reasons I state above. I should have discarded those reasons, but I did not in favor of stability.

I have learned from that experience, and in fact have been critical of Sark from the time of his hiring. His failure to fire Cozzetto last year was the last straw for me, so Sark deserves firing. Not only because of Cozzetto, but because of play calling, recruiting that does not build the core of the team (OL and DL), weak attitudes across the team, and the obvious: three 7-6 records. The first two were more understandable considering the schedules we inherited. The 2012 season was a mess from the beginning. I could see it in the spring practices of 2012 and again in fall practice, and in the opening game against San Diego State, the wheels went off the Husky team after the first two series. They never came back on, even though we had an amazing win against Stanford that somehow blurred the issues once again.

Sark should have been fired after the Apple Cup last year.

If you want stability, the option is obvious. Promote Wilcox and keep the D coaches on board. Keisau coached with Wilcox and Tosh at Cal. Jim Michalzek was the OL coach at Cal at the time. I'm sure you could pull him away from Arizona. Then all you really need is to hire a new OC. Out- Sark, Nansen, Cozetto. In-Michalzek, & new OC. This staff would be able to make huge inroads in the bay area. With Sark & Nansen's frat-boy mentality gone, you'd be able to rebuild in state behind Sirmon. Go out and get the best OC available. Almost any OC would be an upgrade over Sark.

Whatever the case, the sooner Sark is gone the better.

Let's hire Wilcox as head coach. Cause hiring first time head coaches with no head coaching offers worked so well with Sark.

He_Needs_More_Time said:

Let's hire Wilcox as head coach. Cause hiring first time head coaches with no head coaching offers worked so well with Sark.

TierbsHsotBoobs said:

HeretoBeatmyChest said:

He_Needs_More_Time said:

HeretoBeatmyChest said:

Global said:

RoadDawg55 said:

Cozzetto sucks, and it's not even a debate. The last good OL he coached was at ASU in the late 90's. High school recruits were infants and toddlers the last time Cozzetto coached a good OL. That's not an opinion, that's a fact. Having said that, he is not the reason we don't get good OL recruits, Sark is.

Of course, Sark would like to get good OL recruits, but is there any doubt he enjoys recruiting a good QB or WR more than the OL? Don't you think we would have more good OL if Sark personally recruited them and made them know how badly we needed them? Instead, he pawns off the in state guys from 2012 on Cox who fucks it up, and becomes the scapegoat for who is actually responsible for fucking up, the guy in charge, Sark.

Very true. The writing is on the wall.

As SouthernDawg notes, I am big proponent of coaching stability, and against the "coaching carousel" mentality. Coaching stability was a factor in DJ's success, and more recently in Oregon's success. But it depends on having good coaches in place to begin with. In response to SouthernDawg, it is true that for years I have argued in favor of coaching stability, and that lead to me being supportive of coaches who did not deserve support. What i have said also is that (as in the case of Sark and as became the case with Willingham), they should be judged by teams composed of their own recruits who have been coached through their system. I know that there are times when a new coach will have success with the previous team's recruits, but the measure of whether a coach is suitable for longer term -- i.e., whether he can be the guy for coaching stability -- is how his teams do in year's 4-5 when his recruits become upperclassmen trained in his system. I was wrong to support a last year for Willingham, and I said so at the time, but I did support him for the reasons I state above. I should have discarded those reasons, but I did not in favor of stability.

I have learned from that experience, and in fact have been critical of Sark from the time of his hiring. His failure to fire Cozzetto last year was the last straw for me, so Sark deserves firing. Not only because of Cozzetto, but because of play calling, recruiting that does not build the core of the team (OL and DL), weak attitudes across the team, and the obvious: three 7-6 records. The first two were more understandable considering the schedules we inherited. The 2012 season was a mess from the beginning. I could see it in the spring practices of 2012 and again in fall practice, and in the opening game against San Diego State, the wheels went off the Husky team after the first two series. They never came back on, even though we had an amazing win against Stanford that somehow blurred the issues once again.

Sark should have been fired after the Apple Cup last year.

If you want stability, the option is obvious. Promote Wilcox and keep the D coaches on board. Keisau coached with Wilcox and Tosh at Cal. Jim Michalzek was the OL coach at Cal at the time. I'm sure you could pull him away from Arizona. Then all you really need is to hire a new OC. Out- Sark, Nansen, Cozetto. In-Michalzek, & new OC. This staff would be able to make huge inroads in the bay area. With Sark & Nansen's frat-boy mentality gone, you'd be able to rebuild in state behind Sirmon. Go out and get the best OC available. Almost any OC would be an upgrade over Sark.

Whatever the case, the sooner Sark is gone the better.

Let's hire Wilcox as head coach. Cause hiring first time head coaches with no head coaching offers worked so well with Sark.

Trying to equate hiring Wilcox with Sark is one of the stupidest things I've ever heard on this bored. Yeah...the 2 are the same...Except for the fact that Wilcox has improved defenses at three different schools and worked with mediocre and marginal talent while Sark was an OC for 2 years working with 5* talent.

The dude's defense got prison raped by Oregon and blew an 18 point lead in the Apple Cup.

Clearly he deserves a promotion.

TierbsHsotBoobs said:

HeretoBeatmyChest said:

TierbsHsotBoobs said:

HeretoBeatmyChest said:

He_Needs_More_Time said:

HeretoBeatmyChest said:

Global said:

RoadDawg55 said:

Cozzetto sucks, and it's not even a debate. The last good OL he coached was at ASU in the late 90's. High school recruits were infants and toddlers the last time Cozzetto coached a good OL. That's not an opinion, that's a fact. Having said that, he is not the reason we don't get good OL recruits, Sark is.

Of course, Sark would like to get good OL recruits, but is there any doubt he enjoys recruiting a good QB or WR more than the OL? Don't you think we would have more good OL if Sark personally recruited them and made them know how badly we needed them? Instead, he pawns off the in state guys from 2012 on Cox who fucks it up, and becomes the scapegoat for who is actually responsible for fucking up, the guy in charge, Sark.

Very true. The writing is on the wall.

As SouthernDawg notes, I am big proponent of coaching stability, and against the "coaching carousel" mentality. Coaching stability was a factor in DJ's success, and more recently in Oregon's success. But it depends on having good coaches in place to begin with. In response to SouthernDawg, it is true that for years I have argued in favor of coaching stability, and that lead to me being supportive of coaches who did not deserve support. What i have said also is that (as in the case of Sark and as became the case with Willingham), they should be judged by teams composed of their own recruits who have been coached through their system. I know that there are times when a new coach will have success with the previous team's recruits, but the measure of whether a coach is suitable for longer term -- i.e., whether he can be the guy for coaching stability -- is how his teams do in year's 4-5 when his recruits become upperclassmen trained in his system. I was wrong to support a last year for Willingham, and I said so at the time, but I did support him for the reasons I state above. I should have discarded those reasons, but I did not in favor of stability.

I have learned from that experience, and in fact have been critical of Sark from the time of his hiring. His failure to fire Cozzetto last year was the last straw for me, so Sark deserves firing. Not only because of Cozzetto, but because of play calling, recruiting that does not build the core of the team (OL and DL), weak attitudes across the team, and the obvious: three 7-6 records. The first two were more understandable considering the schedules we inherited. The 2012 season was a mess from the beginning. I could see it in the spring practices of 2012 and again in fall practice, and in the opening game against San Diego State, the wheels went off the Husky team after the first two series. They never came back on, even though we had an amazing win against Stanford that somehow blurred the issues once again.

Sark should have been fired after the Apple Cup last year.

If you want stability, the option is obvious. Promote Wilcox and keep the D coaches on board. Keisau coached with Wilcox and Tosh at Cal. Jim Michalzek was the OL coach at Cal at the time. I'm sure you could pull him away from Arizona. Then all you really need is to hire a new OC. Out- Sark, Nansen, Cozetto. In-Michalzek, & new OC. This staff would be able to make huge inroads in the bay area. With Sark & Nansen's frat-boy mentality gone, you'd be able to rebuild in state behind Sirmon. Go out and get the best OC available. Almost any OC would be an upgrade over Sark.

Whatever the case, the sooner Sark is gone the better.

Let's hire Wilcox as head coach. Cause hiring first time head coaches with no head coaching offers worked so well with Sark.

Trying to equate hiring Wilcox with Sark is one of the stupidest things I've ever heard on this bored. Yeah...the 2 are the same...Except for the fact that Wilcox has improved defenses at three different schools and worked with mediocre and marginal talent while Sark was an OC for 2 years working with 5* talent.

The dude's defense got prison raped by Oregon and blew an 18 point lead in the Apple Cup.

Clearly he deserves a promotion.

You missed the part where I said "If you want stability..."

You can pick out a few negative points for anyone. Hell Mora's defense gave up 28+ points 8 fucking times last year including 43 to Cal, 49 to Baylor, 36 to WSU. They fortunately missed Oregon.

Tim DeRuyter's D gave up 40 to San Diego St, 42 to Oregon, and 36 to Nevada.

If you want stability with this coaching staff, you deserve to die in a fucking fire.

Mora's defense was good enough to beat its rival and win its division of the Pac-12.

As for Tim DeRuyter, I don't give a fuck.