Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
Petersen's comments...presented without comment
Comments
-
topdawgnc said:
That's why every coach who is employed by a mid major is 92-12.Canard said:
92-12 mostly compiled in the minors makes you a AAAA phenom, not a major league hall of fame playa. The grinds and seasonal attrition are in no way comparable between the top level and the also ran level. In many ways that matter in big boy football, CPC is next to untested.topdawgnc said:
You're a fucking donkey.Canard said:
You're seriously suggesting that CP is Saban or Stoops caliber? Or that UW has the recruiting brand power for a quick move into national prominence on par with Bama or Oklahoma?topdawgnc said:Bob Stoops and Nick Saban went 7-6 his first year.
How's the marijuana grow going?
Peterman has earned the right to be in the same conversations as Saban and Stoops regarding caliber. 92-12 fucking means something in today's world. So does wins over Stoops, and Kelly.
Washington has facilities, education, and location to be a competitor. Even a donkey like you knows that ... it's the very reason you lurk around here showing your 2 inches of thunder. You know if Washington every gets serious again it could be a good rivalry. The problem is the dumb fucks who think Lockner is a good QB and Sark is a good coach ....
Pete does it week in and out going forward posting a .750+ win rate, (while also closeting the plunger that chased Sark around), and I'll be the first to recant my heresy.
But if you can't see the Sark Stank as a watery version the of Owen-12 excuse for Seven, well no helping and all.
Dude ...
You're a donkey. Quit while you'rea headbehind -
So you're trying to compare college where there are restricted hours you can practice, watch film, and talk to your players to an environment where 24 hours a day you're told what you can do, when you can shit, and essentially when it's okay to breathe? goooooooood analogy.Canard said:
The military does it within months all of the time. You jump out of a plane at Fort Bragg and you stand a good chance of your parachute having been rigged by some PFC on the job less than a year. Sure, the soldier is supervised by someone else ultimately accountable, but that shit is called coaching in other contexts.Tequilla said:My head hurts after reading this thread ...
Biggest fucktarded statement of the day is thinking that paying attention to details is something that you can teach overnight ... just doesn't happen that way.
It's not impossible to rapidly train someone to life and death levels of responsibility, it's just difficult. Charles DeGaulle had a saying, "The graveyards are full of indispensible men," meaning that you do what you must with who you have, not wallow in excuses about who ain't there.
Requiring special people or oodles of time to become highly effective in football when a roster has bright spots of talent available should be a major cause for concern. Oh well, your problem.
Kids get to go home at the end of practice and do other things(sometimes not so conducive with details). If coaches could go full military i'm guessing the detail which you maintain is easy, would be easy. Other than that, you have no clue what you're talking about -
The Army regularly takes guys you wouldn't trust to tie their own shoes and turns them into ass kicking name takers. It is done precisely by hammering on ceaselessly about attention to detail. They still have a ton of fucktards, like the Huskies would still have, but some would excel despite their pedigree.Tequilla said:Canard,
We're not talking about the military here ... we're talking about athletes.
How often do you see PROFESSIONAL players that fail to grasp the details?
My issue regarding UW football is shouldn't someone, somewhere on the UW offense being showing some continuous grasp of "the details" by now?
I am on the record as wanting this series to become competitive again. Stanford's self-imposed constraints, small fan base, and Shaw's hyper conservatism all but ensures they can't sustain a regularly elite level. The P12N needs our annual game to be on par with OU-TX or what UM-tOSU was when it was relevant or this division eventually gets overshadowed by the LA centered one. The North can't become Oregon and the five clown shows, as much fun as being the PNW champ forever might be, because non-competitiveness everywhere else in the division eventually undermines the national perception of the Ducks too. Were you atop the current division since its inception, maybe you'd want Cal to suck less hard, but you'd need someone to more or less permanently step up as your foil. I'm selfishishly hoping you get your shit together so that our game is intriguing rather than a foregone conclusion.
Is Pete the guy to put this series back on the map? Maybe, but his early returns aren't very encouraging because your wins this season are rooted in very crappy performances (save for Cal), over a very undaunting series of losers (including Cal.) At $3.5 million per I'd be pissed by how early the plunger took the stage last Saturday. As it stands, I was pleased.
Let's just say I thought I was going to see something a lot different from what Sark was putting on the field, in terms of all out effort if nothing else, and it's just not that distinct at all. -
It's also becoming patently clear that Bishop Sankey, ASJ, Kevin Smith, Keith Price, and a healthy Kasen Williams made the OL look a lot better than it really is. Not having Riva sucks but Hatchie is just decent, Charles has regressed after added 10-15 pounds of belly fat, Tanigawa is just decent, Atoe is subpar, especially for his size, and Coleman Shelton needed another year in the weigh room before playing a bunch of snaps (let alone starting 6 games).
If Miles starts, I imagine it is because Petersen doesn't want to pull the rug out from under his starter without giving him at least 2 more quarters (and at home) for one last chance to prove himself. I guess the positive is that Petersen / Smith should feel more comfortable running Miles more because Troy Williams now has real-time experience and probably won't shit the bed if Miles goes out again.
Is it unfathomable or could it actually be that, despite returning just Dexter Charles and Coleman Shelton (pretty much played the whole season so far), the OL could be better in 2015 with another year of development and another year of getting coached up by Strausser? Eldrenkamp is supposed to be the heir-apparent at LT, Charles will be back at LG, Crane or Tunfunga at Center, Brostek or Kirkland at RG, and Coleman Shelton back at RT? Matt James was reasonably recruited out of high school but one has to imagine he needs at least another year in the weight room before seeing the field against Pac-12 teams.
-
Canard said:
The military does it within months all of the time. You jump out of a plane at Fort Bragg and you stand a good chance of your parachute having been rigged by some PFC on the job less than a year. Sure, the soldier is supervised by someone else ultimately accountable, but that shit is called coaching in other contexts.Tequilla said:My head hurts after reading this thread ...
Biggest fucktarded statement of the day is thinking that paying attention to details is something that you can teach overnight ... just doesn't happen that way.
It's not impossible to rapidly train someone to life and death levels of responsibility, it's just difficult. Charles DeGaulle had a saying, "The graveyards are full of indispensible men," meaning that you do what you must with who you have, not wallow in excuses about who ain't there.
Requiring special people or oodles of time to become highly effective in football when a roster has bright spots of talent available should be a major cause for concern. Oh well, your problem.
Canard is spiraling out of control again.
Did he really just compare living in barracks 24/7 training to kill to a college athlete living in dorms with practice hour restrictions, classes, and social life?
Holee Fuck.
-
topdawgnc said:
That's why every coach who is employed by a mid major is 92-12.Canard said:
92-12 mostly compiled in the minors makes you a AAAA phenom, not a major league hall of fame playa. The grinds and seasonal attrition are in no way comparable between the top level and the also ran level. In many ways that matter in big boy football, CPC is next to untested.topdawgnc said:
You're a fucking donkey.Canard said:
You're seriously suggesting that CP is Saban or Stoops caliber? Or that UW has the recruiting brand power for a quick move into national prominence on par with Bama or Oklahoma?topdawgnc said:Bob Stoops and Nick Saban went 7-6 his first year.
How's the marijuana grow going?
Peterman has earned the right to be in the same conversations as Saban and Stoops regarding caliber. 92-12 fucking means something in today's world. So does wins over Stoops, and Kelly.
Washington has facilities, education, and location to be a competitor. Even a donkey like you knows that ... it's the very reason you lurk around here showing your 2 inches of thunder. You know if Washington every gets serious again it could be a good rivalry. The problem is the dumb fucks who think Lockner is a good QB and Sark is a good coach ....
Pete does it week in and out going forward posting a .750+ win rate, (while also closeting the plunger that chased Sark around), and I'll be the first to recant my heresy.
But if you can't see the Sark Stank as a watery version the of Owen-12 excuse for Seven, well no helping and all.
Dude ...
You're a donkey. Quit while you're SO FAR BEHIND you think you're ahead. -
disagreeCanard said:
The Army regularly takes guys you wouldn't trust to tie their own shoes and turns them into ass kicking name takers. It is done precisely by hammering on ceaselessly about attention to detail. They still have a ton of fucktards, like the Huskies would still have, but some would excel despite their pedigree.Tequilla said:Canard,
We're not talking about the military here ... we're talking about athletes.
How often do you see PROFESSIONAL players that fail to grasp the details?
My issue regarding UW football is shouldn't someone, somewhere on the UW offense being showing some continuous grasp of "the details" by now?
I am on the record as wanting this series to become competitive again. Stanford's self-imposed constraints, small fan base, and Shaw's hyper conservatism all but ensures they can't sustain a regularly elite level. The P12N needs our annual game to be on par with OU-TX or what UM-tOSU was when it was relevant or this division eventually gets overshadowed by the LA centered one. The North can't become Oregon and the five clown shows, as much fun as being the PNW champ forever might be, because non-competitiveness everywhere else in the division eventually undermines the national perception of the Ducks too. Were you atop the current division since its inception, maybe you'd want Cal to suck less hard, but you'd need someone to more or less permanently step up as your foil. I'm selfishishly hoping you get your shit together so that our game is intriguing rather than a foregone conclusion.
Is Pete the guy to put this series back on the map? Maybe, but his early returns aren't very encouraging because your wins this season are rooted in very crappy performances (save for Cal), over a very undaunting series of losers (including Cal.) At $3.5 million per I'd be pissed by how early the plunger took the stage last Saturday. As it stands, I was pleased.
Let's just say I thought I was going to see something a lot different from what Sark was putting on the field, in terms of all out effort if nothing else, and it's just not that distinct at all. -
I don't care about coach speak. Peterman will always talk about details and getting better, even if we ever become an elite program. The Oregon game sucked, but take some walks with the wives/boyfriends and regain some perspective. Second guessing, venting, and offering arm chair analysis is what we do, but 10 wins has been the mostly agreed upon goal. It wasn't "Beat Oregon, Nothing Else Matters."
-
He's been out over his skis for awhile now.Doogles said:Canard is spiraling out of control in this thread.
Did he really just compare living in barracks 24/7 training to kill to a college athlete living in dorms with practice hour restrictions, classes, and social life?
Holee Fuck. -
10-3 over the course of eight fucking seasons.HFNY said:Wasn't Petersen's record vs. BCS teams something like 10-3 in his time at BSU? He also had a winning record against top 25 teams. I'm just not sure how C'Tard can explain that away
That's putting in work. Many teams will duplicate that record inside of this one season.
I laugh at the 92-12 record because all of the bright spots in it are in September or January.
Lots of d-1 coaches would kill it prepping for one BCS foe all summer and the other (only in some years) during all of December, with eleven+ functional bye weeks in between. -
Dude.Canard said:
10-3 over the course of eight fucking seasons.HFNY said:Wasn't Petersen's record vs. BCS teams something like 10-3 in his time at BSU? He also had a winning record against top 25 teams. I'm just not sure how C'Tard can explain that away
That's putting in work. Many teams will duplicate that record inside of this one season.
I laugh at the 92-12 record because all of the bright spots in it are in September or January.
Lots of d-1 coaches would kill it prepping for one BCS foe all summer and the other (only in some years) during all of December, with eleven+ functional bye weeks in between.
Just stop.
You're continuing to embarrass yourself.
There's only one fucktard in America who would argue that a 92-12 record is bullshit smoke and mirrors ...
Let's see if you can figure out who it is.
-
I'm just laying it out there for posterity. If I am right, and I believe the track record of past BullShit U headmen moving up to the big boy leagues supports my position, I'll have all of the screenshots I need.
It's not like I have been running from this banter those times I have been wrong during the past eighteen years. -
In one game, or cumulative for the remainder of the season?DerekJohnson said:We're four 90+ yard drives away from being a top 5 team
-
In this thread
-
Covering your ass, eh?Canard said:I'm just laying it out there for posterity. If I am right, and I believe the track record of past BullShit U headmen moving up to the big boy leagues supports my position, I'll have all of the screenshots I need.
It's not like I have been running from this banter those times I have been wrong during the past eighteen years. -
It's okay. My wager is that I will have the last laugh on this topic.dnc said:In this thread
-
Canard said:
I'm just laying it out there for posterity. If I am right, and I believe the track record of past BullShit U headmen moving up to the big boy leagues supports my position, I'll have all of the screenshots I need.
It's not like I have been running from this banter those times I have been wrong during the past eighteen years.
-
Peterman is the only two time Bear Bryant award recipient. Inferring from fucking donkey's comments, Peterman was undeserving. Let posterity know the fucking donkey is right. Good grief.topdawgnc said:
You're a fucking donkey.Canard said:
You're seriously suggesting that CP is Saban or Stoops caliber? Or that UW has the recruiting brand power for a quick move into national prominence on par with Bama or Oklahoma?topdawgnc said:Bob Stoops and Nick Saban went 7-6 his first year.
How's the marijuana grow going?
Peterman has earned the right to be in the same conversations as Saban and Stoops regarding caliber. 92-12 fucking means something in today's world. So does wins over Stoops, and Kelly.
Washington has facilities, education, and location to be a competitor. Even a donkey like you knows that ... it's the very reason you lurk around here showing your 2 inches of thunder. You know if Washington every gets serious again it could be a good rivalry. The problem is the dumb fucks who think Lockner is a good QB and Sark is a good coach .... -
Noted.dnc said:
-
Canard said:
I'll have all of the screenshots I need.
Insecure dumb fuck. . ... SMFH. In the moron's defense though, he did say IF. -
Canard showed more balls and want to on this bored than Petahmus showed in Autzen Saturday night.
Just saying..... -
Insecure dumb fuck. . ... SMFH. In the moron's defense though, he did say IF.
I'm just a pussy that way, what with the constant denial flowing so strongly around the canal all these years. -
So you'd prefer to be right rather than UW be successful?Canard said:
It's okay. My wager is that I will have the last laugh on this topic.dnc said:In this thread
Also, as someone who's been in the town where all these coaches come from that you speak, peterman and hawkins couldn't be further apart if you tried. Hawkins was much more Sark in terms of the guy who has fun but also loves the media stuff. Peterson has always been the I hate media and just let me do my fucking job guy. Peterman craves perfection and detail while Hawkins merely discussed it.
You're really just throwing shit at the wall b/c if you knew anything about peterman vs hawkins or even further back, you'd know you're full of sheeeet.
-
I support Canard's efforts in this thread.
He's staking out the Peterman-is-Hawkins turf pretty early on. It *has* always been the knock on Boise that they did not have to deal with the week-in, week-out grind of a major conference schedule.
Interestingly, if you subtract Kellen Moore's time at Boise (50-3!) - then Peterman's record with the Broncoz was a very respectable 42-9 (.786).
While .786 is quite good, you can also easily discern that it is at least one standard deviation below what BSU achieved with Moore, and deduce that there was a QB effect at work.
Combine that with the overall trendline (Peterman's last year at Boise with Southwick, they were not very good), and I think a reality-based anti-Peterman argument exists.
Nota bene: 2007 was the year Peterman lost to Ty; 2008 was Kellen Moore's first year under center.
-
7
Games -
And we can start the argument that a real coach can win without talented players...........They are that magicalAZDuck said:I support Canard's efforts in this thread.
He's staking out the Peterman-is-Hawkins turf pretty early on. It *has* always been the knock on Boise that they did not have to deal with the week-in, week-out grind of a major conference schedule.
Interestingly, if you subtract Kellen Moore's time at Boise (50-3!) - then Peterman's record with the Broncoz was a very respectable 42-9 (.786).
While .786 is quite good, you can also easily discern that it is at least one standard deviation below what BSU achieved with Moore, and deduce that there was a QB effect at work.
Combine that with the overall trendline (Peterman's last year at Boise with Southwick, they were not very good), and I think a reality-based anti-Peterman argument exists.
Nota bene: 2007 was the year Peterman lost to Ty; 2008 was Kellen Moore's first year under center.
Don't forget kellen was a OKG nobody wanted -
I only have one big question/concern with Petersen. I could go on and on about the things I do like such as discipline, attention to detail, work ethic, recruiting balance and thorough evaluation, etc.
Boise's offense went to shit without Kellen Moore during Petersen's last two years at Boise. After Moore graduated, Petersen changed his system and went hurry up/no huddle like everyone else. The Boise State fans complained about Prince (the OC) the past two years. UW fans were glad Petersen didn't bring him along to UW. Petersen instead brings along his QB coach of those bad offenses to be the OC at UW. The only coordinator experience he has is at Montana. It's too early to make any bold conclusions, but I suspect that something isn't right. And I think it goes beyond the talent. Finding a Kellen Moore isn't easy. I think this team should be better on offense than it is.
If Petersen is who we think he is, it will get fixed. Great coaches make those changes, Don James in the late 80's being a great example. Or maybe, the players improve with time in the same system. I think it's logical to have some concern about it though. 3 years in a row of mediocre to bad offense is a fair sample size. -
I just want to be clear, I'm not out there on the limb with Canard. I just don't think he's as full of shit as some people out here (Hi Kim!).
Also too, Army barracks are more like college dorms than many of you might think. -
Could go back to Koetter if you'd prefer. He coached BSU to Big West titles and then helmed ASU to some glimmerings of excellence in 2004 that ultimately turned out to be fool's gold.FreeChavez said:
So you'd prefer to be right rather than UW be successful?Canard said:
It's okay. My wager is that I will have the last laugh on this topic.dnc said:In this thread
Also, as someone who's been in the town where all these coaches come from that you speak, peterman and hawkins couldn't be further apart if you tried. Hawkins was much more Sark in terms of the guy who has fun but also loves the media stuff. Peterson has always been the I hate media and just let me do my fucking job guy. Peterman craves perfection and detail while Hawkins merely discussed it.
You're really just throwing shit at the wall b/c if you knew anything about peterman vs hawkins or even further back, you'd know you're full of sheeeet.
I wouldn't mind seeing UW successful enough to supplant boring and fanless Stanford, even if it meant taking the L in the UW-UO game at times.
My deal is that a faction of our fans had always lusted over CCP at times, but I have never been down with it because of the easy time the trucker JC has always had since ESPN needed Tuesday and Wednesday night football and tried to make like BSU played a credible schedule.
All the credit in the world to CCP for pulling off a 10-3 against actual competition. That would be one above average season, just like I contended. That it took eight years puts a big fucking asterisk upon it.
