Does anyone think the up-tempo offense will mask our O-line?
Comments
-
Please tell me you really aren't this stupid.He_Needs_More_Time said:
Mickens in 13 games(most of which were starts) in a passing offense only had 20 receptions for 190 yards(9.5 YPC) with a touchdown.IrishDawg22 said:
Next Jordan Polk??? Mickens had 20 catches despite the drops in his frosh year. Polk didn't have 20 catches in 3 years.He_Needs_More_Time said:Mickens is the next Jordan Polk. He'll be suddenly seniored going into 2015.
I don't have much faith in a kid who can't catch. Sure he has speed much like J.Polk did but he doesn't appear to be a WR. With Ross, Daniels, Stringfellow coming in plus Taylor back to WR. Not to mention Sark is always bringing in 4 star WR's it's now time for Mickens.
As always I hope I'm wrong on this kid would be nice to see someone in this program make a big leap for once.
And once again you claim no one has developed in this program.
How do you see your screen with all the shit piled up from your keyboard?
He wasn't very good at all.
Show me where I said Mickens was good last year.
I was pointing out that comparing him to Polk was another one of your fucking fact free post.
Then you spin it as me being the president of the Mickens' fan club.
Classic Noog move.
-
He_Needs_More_Time said:
Mickens is the next Jordan Polk. He'll be suddenly seniored going into 2015.
I don't have much faith in a kid who can't catch. Sure he has speed much like J.Polk did but he doesn't appear to be a WR. With Ross, Daniels, Stringfellow coming in plus Taylor back to WR. Not to mention Sark is always bringing in 4 star WR's it's now time for Mickens.
As always I hope I'm wrong on this kid would be nice to see someone in this program make a big leap for once.
Wow, a very cogent and coherent post...especially the stinkhole partpuppylove_sugarsteel said:
Well no shit time-needer. Football has always been about the point-of-attack. The OL and TEs !!! Dave Janoski was aHe_Needs_More_Time said:This is why I think OL recruiting/player development is so important. I feel like you can mask average WR's(James era and the 2000 RB title team are proof of that), you can even mask an average RB(rankin had a big year for UW), in college you can mask an average QB if he's smart.
On offense though you can't mask an average to bad OL. They will always be exposed if they are bad. It won't matter what offense you run your OL will be exposed.
Besides Price isn't the type of QB like a Wilson or even a Locker who can "mask" the OL far as sacks given up. The OL will be terrible this year and the no huddle should hurt them as you are running more plays. Just more opportunities to fuck it up.
our featured wide receiver for f*** sake. nothing has changed except our head coach and the quality of oline recruiting.
Ill take Janoski and that Oline anyday over the 14 fucking WR's we have on the roster. Sark has his head so far up his stinkhole he doesn't know if he's running or throwing.
at USC it was quite simple. run the f****** football. student body right. then burn people with Dwayne Jarrett on f****** crossing routes and corner posts. It was such a simple offense and they just flat beat up everybody they played because the oline just crushed the guys in front of them.
UW hasn't been able to do that because Sark hasn't recruited those types of athletes to man the point of attack, so he has to get cute and throw the ball all over the yard. Jesus Sark, call your old buddy Nuss, go visit an Alabama practice. Refresh your memory on what it takes to be a consistent winner at this level. -
You implied that Mickens wasn't going to be suddenly seniored and wasn't that bad. You even referenced that he had 20 catches like it was good.IrishDawg22 said:
Please tell me you really aren't this stupid.He_Needs_More_Time said:
Mickens in 13 games(most of which were starts) in a passing offense only had 20 receptions for 190 yards(9.5 YPC) with a touchdown.IrishDawg22 said:
Next Jordan Polk??? Mickens had 20 catches despite the drops in his frosh year. Polk didn't have 20 catches in 3 years.He_Needs_More_Time said:Mickens is the next Jordan Polk. He'll be suddenly seniored going into 2015.
I don't have much faith in a kid who can't catch. Sure he has speed much like J.Polk did but he doesn't appear to be a WR. With Ross, Daniels, Stringfellow coming in plus Taylor back to WR. Not to mention Sark is always bringing in 4 star WR's it's now time for Mickens.
As always I hope I'm wrong on this kid would be nice to see someone in this program make a big leap for once.
And once again you claim no one has developed in this program.
How do you see your screen with all the shit piled up from your keyboard?
He wasn't very good at all.
Show me where I said Mickens was good last year.
I was pointing out that comparing him to Polk was another one of your fucking fact free post.
Then you spin it as me being the president of the Mickens' fan club.
Classic Noog move.
It's time to clean up this board as MickDoog/Loser are destroying it. -
You are a real fucking moron. And I have been trying to type slower for you.He_Needs_More_Time said:
You implied that Mickens wasn't going to be suddenly seniored and wasn't that bad. You even referenced that he had 20 catches like it was good.IrishDawg22 said:
Please tell me you really aren't this stupid.He_Needs_More_Time said:
Mickens in 13 games(most of which were starts) in a passing offense only had 20 receptions for 190 yards(9.5 YPC) with a touchdown.IrishDawg22 said:
Next Jordan Polk??? Mickens had 20 catches despite the drops in his frosh year. Polk didn't have 20 catches in 3 years.He_Needs_More_Time said:Mickens is the next Jordan Polk. He'll be suddenly seniored going into 2015.
I don't have much faith in a kid who can't catch. Sure he has speed much like J.Polk did but he doesn't appear to be a WR. With Ross, Daniels, Stringfellow coming in plus Taylor back to WR. Not to mention Sark is always bringing in 4 star WR's it's now time for Mickens.
As always I hope I'm wrong on this kid would be nice to see someone in this program make a big leap for once.
And once again you claim no one has developed in this program.
How do you see your screen with all the shit piled up from your keyboard?
He wasn't very good at all.
Show me where I said Mickens was good last year.
I was pointing out that comparing him to Polk was another one of your fucking fact free post.
Then you spin it as me being the president of the Mickens' fan club.
Classic Noog move.
It's time to clean up this board as MickDoog/Loser are destroying it.
1. You compared him to Polk
2. I provide actual stats that say he did more in 1 year than Polk did in his entire career. Proving once again you pull shit straight out of your ass.
3. You then claim I think Mickens is the 2nd coming of Mario Bailey.
I wonder what would happen if you tried to post without the Noog handbook by your side. -
Where did I say that?!! Where?!!! Show me one link where I said that?IrishDawg22 said:
You are a real fucking moron. And I have been trying to type slower for you.He_Needs_More_Time said:
You implied that Mickens wasn't going to be suddenly seniored and wasn't that bad. You even referenced that he had 20 catches like it was good.IrishDawg22 said:
Please tell me you really aren't this stupid.He_Needs_More_Time said:
Mickens in 13 games(most of which were starts) in a passing offense only had 20 receptions for 190 yards(9.5 YPC) with a touchdown.IrishDawg22 said:
Next Jordan Polk??? Mickens had 20 catches despite the drops in his frosh year. Polk didn't have 20 catches in 3 years.He_Needs_More_Time said:Mickens is the next Jordan Polk. He'll be suddenly seniored going into 2015.
I don't have much faith in a kid who can't catch. Sure he has speed much like J.Polk did but he doesn't appear to be a WR. With Ross, Daniels, Stringfellow coming in plus Taylor back to WR. Not to mention Sark is always bringing in 4 star WR's it's now time for Mickens.
As always I hope I'm wrong on this kid would be nice to see someone in this program make a big leap for once.
And once again you claim no one has developed in this program.
How do you see your screen with all the shit piled up from your keyboard?
He wasn't very good at all.
Show me where I said Mickens was good last year.
I was pointing out that comparing him to Polk was another one of your fucking fact free post.
Then you spin it as me being the president of the Mickens' fan club.
Classic Noog move.
It's time to clean up this board as MickDoog/Loser are destroying it.
1. You compared him to Polk
2. I provide actual stats that say he did more in 1 year than Polk did in his entire career. Proving once again you pull shit straight out of your ass.
3. You then claim I think Mickens is the 2nd coming of Mario Bailey.
I wonder what would happen if you tried to post without the Noog handbook by your side.
What a hypocritical post you just made. -
He_Needs_More_Time said:
Where did I say that?!! Where?!!! Show me one link where I said that?IrishDawg22 said:
You are a real fucking moron. And I have been trying to type slower for you.He_Needs_More_Time said:
You implied that Mickens wasn't going to be suddenly seniored and wasn't that bad. You even referenced that he had 20 catches like it was good.IrishDawg22 said:
Please tell me you really aren't this stupid.He_Needs_More_Time said:
Mickens in 13 games(most of which were starts) in a passing offense only had 20 receptions for 190 yards(9.5 YPC) with a touchdown.IrishDawg22 said:
Next Jordan Polk??? Mickens had 20 catches despite the drops in his frosh year. Polk didn't have 20 catches in 3 years.He_Needs_More_Time said:Mickens is the next Jordan Polk. He'll be suddenly seniored going into 2015.
I don't have much faith in a kid who can't catch. Sure he has speed much like J.Polk did but he doesn't appear to be a WR. With Ross, Daniels, Stringfellow coming in plus Taylor back to WR. Not to mention Sark is always bringing in 4 star WR's it's now time for Mickens.
As always I hope I'm wrong on this kid would be nice to see someone in this program make a big leap for once.
And once again you claim no one has developed in this program.
How do you see your screen with all the shit piled up from your keyboard?
He wasn't very good at all.
Show me where I said Mickens was good last year.
I was pointing out that comparing him to Polk was another one of your fucking fact free post.
Then you spin it as me being the president of the Mickens' fan club.
Classic Noog move.
It's time to clean up this board as MickDoog/Loser are destroying it.
1. You compared him to Polk
2. I provide actual stats that say he did more in 1 year than Polk did in his entire career. Proving once again you pull shit straight out of your ass.
3. You then claim I think Mickens is the 2nd coming of Mario Bailey.
I wonder what would happen if you tried to post without the Noog handbook by your side.
What a hypocritical post you just made.
Do I really need to explain that to you?
Hint: it might have to do with your normal spin job
HTH:
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/exaggerate -
BTW
Jaydon Mickens career has 20 receptions for 190 yards(9.5 YPC)
Jordan Polk career had 16 receptions for 191 yards(11.9 YPC)
What a "horrible" comparison comparing those two 4* WR's who have eerily similar stats.
-
It is a horrible comparison if Mickens plays another year.He_Needs_More_Time said:BTW
Jaydon Mickens career has 20 receptions for 190 yards(9.5 YPC)
Jordan Polk career had 16 receptions for 191 yards(11.9 YPC)
What a "horrible" comparison comparing those two 4* WR's who have eerily similar stats. -
He'll play this year but I don't think he's going to add much to his totals with Kasen, ASJ, Kevin Smith is back healthy(supposedly), DiAndre Campbell, Kendyl Taylor back at Wr plus three 4* true frosh WR's.TierbsHsotBoobs said:
It is a horrible comparison if Mickens plays another year.He_Needs_More_Time said:BTW
Jaydon Mickens career has 20 receptions for 190 yards(9.5 YPC)
Jordan Polk career had 16 receptions for 191 yards(11.9 YPC)
What a "horrible" comparison comparing those two 4* WR's who have eerily similar stats.
Also I was trying to think of a 4* WR bust off the top of my head and Polk came to mind. I couldn't compare him to the blue collar hard working lunch pale of a WR like Cody Bruns. -
Thanks for the screen shot. This post sums up your entire body of work on this site.He_Needs_More_Time said:BTW
Jaydon Mickens career has 20 receptions for 190 yards(9.5 YPC)
Jordan Polk career had 16 receptions for 191 yards(11.9 YPC)
What a "horrible" comparison comparing those two 4* WR's who have eerily similar stats.
Pure comedy. -
Sorry, I was laughing too hard to respond to your post.He_Needs_More_Time said:BTW
Jaydon Mickens career has 20 receptions for 190 yards(9.5 YPC)
Jordan Polk career had 16 receptions for 191 yards(11.9 YPC)
What a "horrible" comparison comparing those two 4* WR's who have eerily similar stats.
1st - Jordan Polk was NOT a 4* guy (Scout 3*, Rivals 2*, ESPN 3*)
2nd - Mickens stats = 1 season Polk = career
Stick to calling me a Doog, etc. It is obvious facts are not your friend. -
He_Needs_More_Time said:
He'll play this year but I don't think he's going to add much to his totals with Kasen, ASJ, Kevin Smith is back healthy(supposedly), DiAndre Campbell, Kendyl Taylor back at Wr plus three 4* true frosh WR's.TierbsHsotBoobs said:
It is a horrible comparison if Mickens plays another year.He_Needs_More_Time said:BTW
Jaydon Mickens career has 20 receptions for 190 yards(9.5 YPC)
Jordan Polk career had 16 receptions for 191 yards(11.9 YPC)
What a "horrible" comparison comparing those two 4* WR's who have eerily similar stats.
Also I was trying to think of a 4* WR bust off the top of my head and Polk came to mind. I couldn't compare him to the blue collar hard working Steve Largent lunch pale of a WR like Cody Bruns. -
Fact - you accuse HeNeedsMoreTime of calling you president of the Jordan Polk fan club.IrishDawg22 said:
Sorry, I was laughing too hard to respond to your post.He_Needs_More_Time said:BTW
Jaydon Mickens career has 20 receptions for 190 yards(9.5 YPC)
Jordan Polk career had 16 receptions for 191 yards(11.9 YPC)
What a "horrible" comparison comparing those two 4* WR's who have eerily similar stats.
1st - Jordan Polk was NOT a 4* guy (Scout 3*, Rivals 2*, ESPN 3*)
2nd - Mickens stats = 1 season Polk = career
Stick to calling me a Doog, etc. It is obvious facts are not your friend.
Fact - he never did.
Fact - you accuse HeNeedsMoreTime of saying that you claimed Jordan Polk was the second coming of Mario Bailey.
Fact - he never did.
Fact - you took implications made by HeNeedsMoreTime to create your own "spin," all the while discrediting everything he said by claiming that he is "spinning". -
He just trolls it's what he did on dawgboard. He will never give up an argument and just continue to spin more shit to make his point. Just read his spin job on how the Seahawks aren't a run first team despite every statistic showing that they are.BAMAdawg10 said:
Fact - you accuse HeNeedsMoreTime of calling you president of the Jordan Polk fan club.IrishDawg22 said:
Sorry, I was laughing too hard to respond to your post.He_Needs_More_Time said:BTW
Jaydon Mickens career has 20 receptions for 190 yards(9.5 YPC)
Jordan Polk career had 16 receptions for 191 yards(11.9 YPC)
What a "horrible" comparison comparing those two 4* WR's who have eerily similar stats.
1st - Jordan Polk was NOT a 4* guy (Scout 3*, Rivals 2*, ESPN 3*)
2nd - Mickens stats = 1 season Polk = career
Stick to calling me a Doog, etc. It is obvious facts are not your friend.
Fact - he never did.
Fact - you accuse HeNeedsMoreTime of saying that you claimed Jordan Polk was the second coming of Mario Bailey.
Fact - he never did.
Fact - you took implications made by HeNeedsMoreTime to create your own "spin," all the while discrediting everything he said by claiming that he is "spinning". -
This just in, Jordan Polk is now a 5* guy that never developed.
-
Another classic screenshot.He_Needs_More_Time said:
He just trolls it's what he did on dawgboard. He will never give up an argument and just continue to spin more shit to make his point. Just read his spin job on how the Seahawks aren't a run first team despite every statistic showing that they are.BAMAdawg10 said:
Fact - you accuse HeNeedsMoreTime of calling you president of the Jordan Polk fan club.IrishDawg22 said:
Sorry, I was laughing too hard to respond to your post.He_Needs_More_Time said:BTW
Jaydon Mickens career has 20 receptions for 190 yards(9.5 YPC)
Jordan Polk career had 16 receptions for 191 yards(11.9 YPC)
What a "horrible" comparison comparing those two 4* WR's who have eerily similar stats.
1st - Jordan Polk was NOT a 4* guy (Scout 3*, Rivals 2*, ESPN 3*)
2nd - Mickens stats = 1 season Polk = career
Stick to calling me a Doog, etc. It is obvious facts are not your friend.
Fact - he never did.
Fact - you accuse HeNeedsMoreTime of saying that you claimed Jordan Polk was the second coming of Mario Bailey.
Fact - he never did.
Fact - you took implications made by HeNeedsMoreTime to create your own "spin," all the while discrediting everything he said by claiming that he is "spinning".
Can you link where I said the Hawks are not a run 1st team?
Clean the shit off you keyboard before you post. -
Pete Carroll hired Yes Men at USC. That's what Sark was. It still comes from the top.RoadDawg55 said:
I prefer the Todd Elstrom being the #1 WR on the 2000 team as an example of line play over WR's. The Lambright coached Janoski teams were not that great, and are not the best example considering they never really won anything.puppylove_sugarsteel said:
Well no shit time-needer. Football has always been about the point-of-attack. The OL and TEs !!! Dave Janoski was aHe_Needs_More_Time said:This is why I think OL recruiting/player development is so important. I feel like you can mask average WR's(James era and the 2000 RB title team are proof of that), you can even mask an average RB(rankin had a big year for UW), in college you can mask an average QB if he's smart.
On offense though you can't mask an average to bad OL. They will always be exposed if they are bad. It won't matter what offense you run your OL will be exposed.
Besides Price isn't the type of QB like a Wilson or even a Locker who can "mask" the OL far as sacks given up. The OL will be terrible this year and the no huddle should hurt them as you are running more plays. Just more opportunities to fuck it up.
our featured wide receiver for f*** sake. nothing has changed except our head coach and the quality of oline recruiting.
Ill take Janoski and that Oline anyday over the 14 fucking WR's we have on the roster. Sark has his head so far up his stinkhole he doesn't know if he's running or throwing.
at USC it was quite simple. run the f****** football. student body right. then burn people with Dwayne Jarrett on f****** crossing routes and corner posts. It was such a simple offense and they just flat beat up everybody they played because the oline just crushed the guys in front of them.
UW hasn't been able to do that because Sark hasn't recruited those types of athletes to man the point of attack, so he has to get cute and throw the ball all over the yard. Jesus Sark, call your old buddy Nuss, go visit an Alabama practice. Refresh your memory on what it takes to be a consistent winner at this level.
I do agree with the rest of your post. The problem is, Sark has assembled a bunch of yes men to compose his offensive coaching staff. Nobody reigns him in like Carroll did at USC. He is incredibly predictable as well. If he has an incomplete pass on first down, he runs on second down. If our defense forces a turnover, he tries to go deep every time (This drives me crazy!) -
Can you link where he claimed you said Jordan Polk was the second coming of Mario Bailey?IrishDawg22 said:
Another classic screenshot.He_Needs_More_Time said:
He just trolls it's what he did on dawgboard. He will never give up an argument and just continue to spin more shit to make his point. Just read his spin job on how the Seahawks aren't a run first team despite every statistic showing that they are.BAMAdawg10 said:
Fact - you accuse HeNeedsMoreTime of calling you president of the Jordan Polk fan club.IrishDawg22 said:
Sorry, I was laughing too hard to respond to your post.He_Needs_More_Time said:BTW
Jaydon Mickens career has 20 receptions for 190 yards(9.5 YPC)
Jordan Polk career had 16 receptions for 191 yards(11.9 YPC)
What a "horrible" comparison comparing those two 4* WR's who have eerily similar stats.
1st - Jordan Polk was NOT a 4* guy (Scout 3*, Rivals 2*, ESPN 3*)
2nd - Mickens stats = 1 season Polk = career
Stick to calling me a Doog, etc. It is obvious facts are not your friend.
Fact - he never did.
Fact - you accuse HeNeedsMoreTime of saying that you claimed Jordan Polk was the second coming of Mario Bailey.
Fact - he never did.
Fact - you took implications made by HeNeedsMoreTime to create your own "spin," all the while discrediting everything he said by claiming that he is "spinning".
Can you link where I said the Hawks are not a run 1st team?
Clean the shit off you keyboard before you post.
If you're going to accuse posters of making shit up, it's probably a good idea that you don't do it yourself. -
Did you miss the exaggeration post?BAMAdawg10 said:
Can you link where he claimed you said Jordan Polk was the second coming of Mario Bailey?IrishDawg22 said:
Another classic screenshot.He_Needs_More_Time said:
He just trolls it's what he did on dawgboard. He will never give up an argument and just continue to spin more shit to make his point. Just read his spin job on how the Seahawks aren't a run first team despite every statistic showing that they are.BAMAdawg10 said:
Fact - you accuse HeNeedsMoreTime of calling you president of the Jordan Polk fan club.IrishDawg22 said:
Sorry, I was laughing too hard to respond to your post.He_Needs_More_Time said:BTW
Jaydon Mickens career has 20 receptions for 190 yards(9.5 YPC)
Jordan Polk career had 16 receptions for 191 yards(11.9 YPC)
What a "horrible" comparison comparing those two 4* WR's who have eerily similar stats.
1st - Jordan Polk was NOT a 4* guy (Scout 3*, Rivals 2*, ESPN 3*)
2nd - Mickens stats = 1 season Polk = career
Stick to calling me a Doog, etc. It is obvious facts are not your friend.
Fact - he never did.
Fact - you accuse HeNeedsMoreTime of saying that you claimed Jordan Polk was the second coming of Mario Bailey.
Fact - he never did.
Fact - you took implications made by HeNeedsMoreTime to create your own "spin," all the while discrediting everything he said by claiming that he is "spinning".
Can you link where I said the Hawks are not a run 1st team?
Clean the shit off you keyboard before you post.
If you're going to accuse posters of making shit up, it's probably a good idea that you don't do it yourself.
Step 1 - he compares Mickens to Polk
Step 2 - I point out Mickens did more in 1 yr than Polk did in his entire career
Step 3 - he changes argument to 20 catches in a year is not good. I use a dash of sarcasm combined with a splash of exaggeration to point out I never claimed 20 catches was good, just better than Polk's entire career.
HTH
-
I agree it comes from the top, but I disagree about Carroll hiring yes men. Say what you want about Sark and Kiffin, but they were very ambitous young coaches. I don't think Chow, Oregeron, and Norton were yes men either.DerekJohnson said:
Pete Carroll hired Yes Men at USC. That's what Sark was. It still comes from the top.RoadDawg55 said:
I prefer the Todd Elstrom being the #1 WR on the 2000 team as an example of line play over WR's. The Lambright coached Janoski teams were not that great, and are not the best example considering they never really won anything.puppylove_sugarsteel said:
Well no shit time-needer. Football has always been about the point-of-attack. The OL and TEs !!! Dave Janoski was aHe_Needs_More_Time said:This is why I think OL recruiting/player development is so important. I feel like you can mask average WR's(James era and the 2000 RB title team are proof of that), you can even mask an average RB(rankin had a big year for UW), in college you can mask an average QB if he's smart.
On offense though you can't mask an average to bad OL. They will always be exposed if they are bad. It won't matter what offense you run your OL will be exposed.
Besides Price isn't the type of QB like a Wilson or even a Locker who can "mask" the OL far as sacks given up. The OL will be terrible this year and the no huddle should hurt them as you are running more plays. Just more opportunities to fuck it up.
our featured wide receiver for f*** sake. nothing has changed except our head coach and the quality of oline recruiting.
Ill take Janoski and that Oline anyday over the 14 fucking WR's we have on the roster. Sark has his head so far up his stinkhole he doesn't know if he's running or throwing.
at USC it was quite simple. run the f****** football. student body right. then burn people with Dwayne Jarrett on f****** crossing routes and corner posts. It was such a simple offense and they just flat beat up everybody they played because the oline just crushed the guys in front of them.
UW hasn't been able to do that because Sark hasn't recruited those types of athletes to man the point of attack, so he has to get cute and throw the ball all over the yard. Jesus Sark, call your old buddy Nuss, go visit an Alabama practice. Refresh your memory on what it takes to be a consistent winner at this level.
I do agree with the rest of your post. The problem is, Sark has assembled a bunch of yes men to compose his offensive coaching staff. Nobody reigns him in like Carroll did at USC. He is incredibly predictable as well. If he has an incomplete pass on first down, he runs on second down. If our defense forces a turnover, he tries to go deep every time (This drives me crazy!)
Kiesau, Nansen, and Dougherty are yes men. When Nuss left, what did Sark do? He didn't go out and hire the best replacement he could, he hired a guy who had already failed as an OC who was really a WR coach. Even this year with Tui, Sark did not go out and hire the best, proven QB coach, he hired a first time QB coach. I don't see him hiring a staff that will challenge him.
-
Quite right, ambitious people never suck up to their boss.
-
In Seattle I don't think Carroll has hired yes men. He retained Bradley, hired Bevell and Cable.
Cable sure as fuck isn't a yes man. I don't agree that Pete surrounded himself with yes men even at USC. -
People that sat in coaches meetings at USC witnessed most of the staff sucking up to Carroll and not challenging him. According to those people, Carroll liked it that way. It was allegedly what drove a rift between Chow and Carroll.
-
Chow has a rift with a lot of coaches though to be fair.DerekJohnson said:People that sat in coaches meetings at USC witnessed most of the staff sucking up to Carroll and not challenging him. According to those people, Carroll liked it that way. It was allegedly what drove a rift between Chow and Carroll.
-
Sounds an awful lot like a whisper campaign. Seems someone has an agenda.DerekJohnson said:People that sat in coaches meetings at USC witnessed most of the staff sucking up to Carroll and not challenging him. According to those people, Carroll liked it that way. It was allegedly what drove a rift between Chow and Carroll.
-
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/06/sports/ncaafootball/06ucla.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0DerekJohnson said:People that sat in coaches meetings at USC witnessed most of the staff sucking up to Carroll and not challenging him. According to those people, Carroll liked it that way. It was allegedly what drove a rift between Chow and Carroll.
Good read about what went down with Carroll, Chow, Kiffin, and Sark. I'm sure it's not the whole story, but it seems like Sark and Kiffin had as much to do with nudging Chow out as a rift with Carroll.
-
I'll check that out later today. Thanks for posting it.RoadDawg55 said:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/06/sports/ncaafootball/06ucla.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0DerekJohnson said:People that sat in coaches meetings at USC witnessed most of the staff sucking up to Carroll and not challenging him. According to those people, Carroll liked it that way. It was allegedly what drove a rift between Chow and Carroll.
Good read about what went down with Carroll, Chow, Kiffin, and Sark. I'm sure it's not the whole story, but it seems like Sark and Kiffin had as much to do with nudging Chow out as a rift with Carroll. -
I think I understand. When making arguments, all other posters must be 100% factual, otherwise it's Noog (ROFTLMAO!) spin. When you make arguments, you can exaggerate and be sarcastic.IrishDawg22 said:
Did you miss the exaggeration post?BAMAdawg10 said:
Can you link where he claimed you said Jordan Polk was the second coming of Mario Bailey?IrishDawg22 said:
Another classic screenshot.He_Needs_More_Time said:
He just trolls it's what he did on dawgboard. He will never give up an argument and just continue to spin more shit to make his point. Just read his spin job on how the Seahawks aren't a run first team despite every statistic showing that they are.BAMAdawg10 said:
Fact - you accuse HeNeedsMoreTime of calling you president of the Jordan Polk fan club.IrishDawg22 said:
Sorry, I was laughing too hard to respond to your post.He_Needs_More_Time said:BTW
Jaydon Mickens career has 20 receptions for 190 yards(9.5 YPC)
Jordan Polk career had 16 receptions for 191 yards(11.9 YPC)
What a "horrible" comparison comparing those two 4* WR's who have eerily similar stats.
1st - Jordan Polk was NOT a 4* guy (Scout 3*, Rivals 2*, ESPN 3*)
2nd - Mickens stats = 1 season Polk = career
Stick to calling me a Doog, etc. It is obvious facts are not your friend.
Fact - he never did.
Fact - you accuse HeNeedsMoreTime of saying that you claimed Jordan Polk was the second coming of Mario Bailey.
Fact - he never did.
Fact - you took implications made by HeNeedsMoreTime to create your own "spin," all the while discrediting everything he said by claiming that he is "spinning".
Can you link where I said the Hawks are not a run 1st team?
Clean the shit off you keyboard before you post.
If you're going to accuse posters of making shit up, it's probably a good idea that you don't do it yourself.
Step 1 - he compares Mickens to Polk
Step 2 - I point out Mickens did more in 1 yr than Polk did in his entire career
Step 3 - he changes argument to 20 catches in a year is not good. I use a dash of sarcasm combined with a splash of exaggeration to point out I never claimed 20 catches was good, just better than Polk's entire career.
HTH
And think a little bit longer about what his argument REALLY is. Everyone else seems to get it except you...as usual. -
Let us not forget the Palouse Puke Spread offense that Mike Price utilized at WSU to eventually lead his coogs to a couple of Rose Bowl losses. With up to five receivers split wide and in gaps to dilute pass rush pressure, the obvious purpose of such risky offensive strategy was to compensate for WSU's traditional lack of OL talent and pass-protection blocking ability. It also opened up gaps in the defensive front for the occasional running play,...... providing pass completions were sufficient to get opposing defenders back on their heals. This style of offense is called the Palouse Puke Spread because there's really no way it can protect the QB other than everybody puking on him in the huddle so that he'll always be more difficult to sack.Passion said:I'll be curious to see if this year's sack totals are reduced as a result of the no-huddle. My sense is that it doesn't matter how quickly we run plays, the issue is how fast Price is able to get rid of the ball. As Emtman famously said, "no huddle for three plays isn't that big of a deal."
The strategy of the hurry-up no huddle offense of course can't without the huddle facilitate puking on the QB, but it's purpose is the same: the use of a gimmick which if successful will compensate for the lack of OL talent and it's inabilities for protecting their QB. The question is will Sark's version of this gimmick utilize the option run or pass as the ducks do so affectively? I don't see how it can since KP is not a running threat and as we all should know by now, Sark is a habitual over-the-top pass happy OC when calling plays on the sideline. Opposing defenses can simply focus on stopping or limiting Sankey on the ground while gambling that KP under an all-out pass rush can't beat them with a quick-short passing attack. Without the option of a QB running threat, Sark will be unable to keep KP upright when he typically loses patience and attempts to go long to his gaggle of WR's who can't seem to get open or make the tough catch when they do get open.
It will be interesting to see what if anything Sark tries to accomplish with his hurry-up no huddle attack if such actually exists. Chip Kelly likes Sark so much (and vice versa), I've wondered if Chip before going to the NFL didn't give Sark some help or hints on what might work or not work to fit Sark's offensive personality. Whatever....... it seems obvious to me that any new offensive gimmick attempted by Sark and staff will have the primary purpose of masking sodbuster style the lack of a good Husky quality OL. To do otherwise may just be too much hard work for these guys in recruiting and coaching. But we'll see soon enough........
-
I could care less about stars and rankings. I look at the offer list. This is why I have a little bit more hope for Ross than Mickens. Oregon, Michigan, Wisconsin, Miami all wanted him whereas Mickens was basically Oklahoma State and thats it.
![[Deleted User]](https://wb.vanillicon.com/b14605887e2b6b59902271a0095c9265_100.png)
