More swooning for Pete
"Haven't figured it out. And it's not something you get used to. Losses hurt more now than ever. It's painful. And it's not just 'big' games. They all hurt."
Can you imagine Sark's answer to that question? "Doesn't really bother me. The score isn't indicative of how good the teams are."
Comments
-
Sark would say some pussy shit like "As long as your team takes strides then losses can benefit your team in the long run."
-
"I just need 10 years". No joke, many posters on dickman said Sark needs 10 years, can you believe that shit? Yale and Fleenor among them. A head coach gets 5 years. Pete included...it might take that long to clean up Sark's mess.
Sark took over a better situation than Petersen. (Sark xidnt take over a true 0-12 team). He had a junior QB in Locker, proven runne r in Polk and good line and defense. Pete took over a mess at QB and a terribly thin dline, oline and dB situation depthwise. The starters are great....but not much after that have got reps.. -
Don't forget Sarks 24 hour rule; as long as he's banging a hostess within 24 hours of a loss, he doesn't let it bother him.
-
He needs his meds FRANNY!
-
Listen fuckers, Petersen wouldn't have went 5-7 with Locker and that crew in '09.There's a lot of similarities between that team and this squad.
Petersen has a great starting 22. The remaining roster is no better than UTAH's second unit. (as they haven't played down 1) Sark left Petersen a buttfucking mess not counting the starters. Pull your heads out and look. -
So you are saying the cupboard is bare ya bearded cunt ya?puppylove_sugarsteel said:Listen fuckers, Petersen wouldn't have went 5-7 with Locker and that crew in '09.There's a lot of similarities between that team and this squad.
Petersen has a great starting 22. The remaining roster is no better than UTAH's second unit. (as they haven't played down 1) Sark left Petersen a buttfucking mess not counting the starters. Pull your heads out and look. -
Yale never said Sark needed ten years.
-
I bleat for Pete!
-
Yes you did Yale. I got a timeout for pounding your flabby cunt over the issue.Gladstone said:Yale never said Sark needed ten years.
-
Fuck me runnin' Puppy! Did your brother get ahold of your account again? Where is Cockus when you need him? You're better than that. The '09 team started either Darrion Jones or Talia Crichton at DE. Te'o Nesheim was good, Kikaha is better. Same with a sophomore Ta'Amu vs. a senior Shelton. Josh Gage was the first LB off the bench. The CB's were a true freshman Trufant, Quinton Richardson, and Adam Long. Nick Wood and Greg Christine started on the OL. Kelemete was the best OL even though he moved there during Spring Ball. Dwayne Washington was more proven than Polk was at the time. Polk got hurt in '08, and was terrible in the two or three games he did play.puppylove_sugarsteel said:"I just need 10 years". No joke, many posters on dickman said Sark needs 10 years, can you believe that shit? Yale and Fleenor among them. A head coach gets 5 years. Pete included...it might take that long to clean up Sark's mess.
Sark took over a better situation than Petersen. (Sark xidnt take over a true 0-12 team). He had a junior QB in Locker, proven runne r in Polk and good line and defense. Pete took over a mess at QB and a terribly thin dline, oline and dB situation depthwise. The starters are great....but not much after that have got reps..
The '09 team had some talent in places, but this year's team is way better, especially on the OL and DL. It's not even close. The depth is way better too. Their was no depth on the OL and DL in '09. There is now. Same with LB. The DB depth is young, but is also better. -
This is why I love the bi-polar Puppy.puppylove_sugarsteel said:Listen fuckers, Petersen wouldn't have went 5-7 with Locker and that crew in '09.There's a lot of similarities between that team and this squad.
Petersen has a great starting 22. The remaining roster is no better than UTAH's second unit. (as they haven't played down 1) Sark left Petersen a buttfucking mess not counting the starters. Pull your heads out and look.
First statement is probably true. I think Coach Pete's game management would have turned around a couple of those close losses and got us to 7 or 8 wins.
But you are way off base if you think the roster in 09' is deeper than now. Across the board we are better off at every single position (depth wise) and it is not even close. The 09' probably had more top end talent at certain positions, but the depth was a joke. There were a lot of guys in the program that should have been applying their craft in Ellensburg.
-
Puppy has matched his previous best in senility and stupidity on this thread. Nothing shocking though.
-
No, he didn't. You got a timeout for doing what you always did there, and always do here. You fail miserably in reading comprehension and flail around in a blind, drunken rage...staggering and swinging this way and that until you eventually hit the floor and pass out in a puddle of your own vomit.puppylove_sugarsteel said:
Yes you did Yale. I got a timeout for pounding your flabby cunt over the issue.Gladstone said:Yale never said Sark needed ten years.
-
I'm going to back puppy on this one. I'm going with... This team is void of talent.
Now, when we win 11 games this year with talent as shitty as '09... Who ya gonna give the credit to? -
Uhhh, Sark, duh. It's his guys. Get back to me when Pete wins with his WAC OKGs ;-)sarktastic said:I'm going to back puppy on this one. I'm going with... This team is void of talent.
Now, when we win 11 games this year with talent as shitty as '09... Who ya gonna give the credit to? -
You say that like it's a bad thing.chuck said:You fail miserably in reading comprehension and flail around in a blind, drunken rage...staggering and swinging this way and that until you eventually hit the floor and pass out in a puddle of your own vomit.
-
He's still a pompous tool, so fuck him.Gladstone said:Yale never said Sark needed ten years.
-
I'm not here to judge. I just report what on what I see.Dennis_DeYoung said:
You say that like it's a bad thing.chuck said:You fail miserably in reading comprehension and flail around in a blind, drunken rage...staggering and swinging this way and that until you eventually hit the floor and pass out in a puddle of your own vomit.
-
Depth was a joke (prior to Pete's class). That's a fact and 5 years after Ty "0-12" team. Is it better now? Of course but not by a hell of a lot considering 5 recruiting classesIrishDawg22 said:
This is why I love the bi-polar Puppy.puppylove_sugarsteel said:Listen fuckers, Petersen wouldn't have went 5-7 with Locker and that crew in '09.There's a lot of similarities between that team and this squad.
Petersen has a great starting 22. The remaining roster is no better than UTAH's second unit. (as they haven't played down 1) Sark left Petersen a buttfucking mess not counting the starters. Pull your heads out and look.
First statement is probably true. I think Coach Pete's game management would have turned around a couple of those close losses and got us to 7 or 8 wins.
But you are way off base if you think the roster in 09' is deeper than now. Across the board we are better off at every single position (depth wise) and it is not even close. The 09' probably had more top end talent at certain positions, but the depth was a joke. There were a lot of guys in the program that should have been applying their craft in Ellensburg.
