Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
Would Petersen have landed JTT?
Comments
-
Don’t agree on Azeem, even tho he was my favorite player on the team at the time. Beavers and BBK played well when called upon.chuck said:
It was thin and that had a lot to do with the defense looking overmatched at the end. There was no room at all for injuries and they were bound to happen. There wasn't another Mathis or Victor available.RoadDawg55 said:
No he wasn’t. It’s like calling Eddie a Boise State level talent. Our most talented team was easily the 2016 team.NeGgaPlEaSe said:
He was playing with Boise State Calliber talent. Recruiting was just starting to pick up when he tossed in the towel.haie said:
That's all fine but then he needs to get the fuck off of campus. No statues for 3 straight NY6 losses.chuck said:
Petersen was a good closer. UW won most ecruiting battles that went down to the wire under him, including those against the likes of tOSU. I think those two recruits and the effort it was going to take to get them could've been one factor in him quitting. He didn't want to have to work that hard.WoolleyDoog said:I've wondered if Petersen sensing Emeka and JT being lost to Ohio State with almost no chance to change their minds was one of the reasons he decided to quit. The story about Emeka wearing Ohio State gloves with Petersen went to watch him play part of that.
I assume he would have gotten neither.
Wasn't there strong rumors that like two Junes ago JT had committed or was going to commit to UW?
Oddly I think he had a better chance at JT than Emeka somehow.
It's obvious what happened with Petersen. He didn't want to live at the office, fire undeperforming assistants, retool a floundering offense, and especially not continue the ass kissing to unlikable 16-17 year old kids.
It's OK to recognize his reasons for quitting and still hate him for it. Facts are facts. Rolling over in the bowl games is on him. 8-5 with losses to the likes of Colorado is on him. Whatever he did good is obscured by all of that and it's justifiable. It should be possible to talk about other aspects of his time at UW without rehashing those facts which are already well established though.
Two NFL WR’s, three NFL TE’s, and Gaskin at RB. Defense absolutely stacked everywhere but Buck. That wasn’t Boise level talent.
Scarborough’s long TD had missed tackles by Gaines (tough play and he should have had help), and McIntosh. Bierria had the worst effort on the play and ran himself out of it.
It was also a hell of a run against a gassed defense that gave up a 12 yard run on 3rd and 9 from the Alabama 3. -
The long TD run also had a defender knocking another defender out of the play.RoadDawg55 said:
Don’t agree on Azeem, even tho he was my favorite player on the team at the time. Beavers and BBK played well when called upon.chuck said:
It was thin and that had a lot to do with the defense looking overmatched at the end. There was no room at all for injuries and they were bound to happen. There wasn't another Mathis or Victor available.RoadDawg55 said:
No he wasn’t. It’s like calling Eddie a Boise State level talent. Our most talented team was easily the 2016 team.NeGgaPlEaSe said:
He was playing with Boise State Calliber talent. Recruiting was just starting to pick up when he tossed in the towel.haie said:
That's all fine but then he needs to get the fuck off of campus. No statues for 3 straight NY6 losses.chuck said:
Petersen was a good closer. UW won most ecruiting battles that went down to the wire under him, including those against the likes of tOSU. I think those two recruits and the effort it was going to take to get them could've been one factor in him quitting. He didn't want to have to work that hard.WoolleyDoog said:I've wondered if Petersen sensing Emeka and JT being lost to Ohio State with almost no chance to change their minds was one of the reasons he decided to quit. The story about Emeka wearing Ohio State gloves with Petersen went to watch him play part of that.
I assume he would have gotten neither.
Wasn't there strong rumors that like two Junes ago JT had committed or was going to commit to UW?
Oddly I think he had a better chance at JT than Emeka somehow.
It's obvious what happened with Petersen. He didn't want to live at the office, fire undeperforming assistants, retool a floundering offense, and especially not continue the ass kissing to unlikable 16-17 year old kids.
It's OK to recognize his reasons for quitting and still hate him for it. Facts are facts. Rolling over in the bowl games is on him. 8-5 with losses to the likes of Colorado is on him. Whatever he did good is obscured by all of that and it's justifiable. It should be possible to talk about other aspects of his time at UW without rehashing those facts which are already well established though.
Two NFL WR’s, three NFL TE’s, and Gaskin at RB. Defense absolutely stacked everywhere but Buck. That wasn’t Boise level talent.
Scarborough’s long TD had missed tackles by Gaines (tough play and he should have had help), and McIntosh. Bierria had the worst effort on the play and ran himself out of it.
It was also a hell of a run against a gassed defense that gave up a 12 yard run on 3rd and 9 from the Alabama 3. -
Take that long run away and they did pretty good
-
FireCohen said:
Agree, never giving up cocaineRaceBannon said:No
We still quit last year and he's a quitter before that
Quitters never win. Winners never quit
-
Pulling this out of whether or not Pete staying would have been good for the program and placing it squarely on JTT recruitment, my gut says yes.
Moving forward with the NIL and soft West coast politics it's pretty much game over for the top recruits.
They are going to SEC, Ohio State, or Clemson. -
Can someone explain to me why they think this is the one time in history that a few teams will permanently be left at the top?
There has been a handfull of teams that go on runs every decade or so. Why all of a sudden is this run with Clemson and Alabama the finality of the the sport? -
Because the rules have changed now such that it is basically impossible to catch lightning in a bottle. Unlimited penalty-free transfers, open pay-to-play, and major media conglomerates acting as de facto marketing wings for a very few schools has changed the game. This is like asking why we think Amazon will continue to dominate when leading retailers have come and gone throughout history. The competitive framework has been thrown out the window, that's why.Canadawg said:Can someone explain to me why they think this is the one time in history that a few teams will permanently be left at the top?
There has been a handfull of teams that go on runs every decade or so. Why all of a sudden is this run with Clemson and Alabama the finality of the the sport?
It also doesn't help that demographics are favoring certain regions in terms of number of kids even playing the sport.
Besides, nobody even cares if a decade or two from now the college football landscape changes to become more competitive; people care about THIS SEASON. And this season, we just watched two of the best prospects this state has ever produced answer your question in the most demonstrative way possible. The proof is in the proverbial pudding. -
I dont necessarily agree with you but some points do make sense. I do believe NIL will not be as cut and dry "helps only the blue bloods" as everyone thinks it will be
-
The price of a top-5 quarterback just went from ~$200K (Cam Newton) to ~$800K, and somehow you think this will benefit the teams who previously couldn't come up with the $200K?Canadawg said:I dont necessarily agree with you but some points do make sense. I do believe NIL will not be as cut and dry "helps only the blue bloods" as everyone thinks it will be
-
Well no but those players are entirely already going to the big programs.What I belive is the depth chart of the best teams will be very unstable compared to now.1to392831weretaken said:
The price of a top-5 quarterback just went from ~$200K (Cam Newton) to ~$800K, and somehow you think this will benefit the teams who previously couldn't come up with the $200K?Canadawg said:I dont necessarily agree with you but some points do make sense. I do believe NIL will not be as cut and dry "helps only the blue bloods" as everyone thinks it will be
If you're a low 4* that normally would be fine going to a top 15 recruited team like Michigan for instance you have 2 options:
A ) Go to the top team wait a couple years to play then maybe make the team and start getting attention for NIL cash
B ) go to a top 50 team like Arizona for instance and potentially start right away driving your NIL value up immediately
Top teams may or may not pay the croots directly but that was happening anyways so I don't see how it can get worse than it already is. There are only so many spots for starters and starting time leads to attention.
Note I don't think this will be how every kid feels but I could see it swinging some (more than currently) to pick smaller schools.
