Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
Pessimistic About Next Year And the Future (Tequilla Long)
Comments
-
I think "there is no reason they couldn't beat ASU" was the call, right? Expect we all knew the offense is simply a mess. Barely D1 shit here.dhdawg said:
They were very capable of beating ASU, if the correct coaching adjustments were made and Petersen chose Lindquist and pounded them with the run all game, UW very well may have won that game.MikeDamone said:
It's not a failure to those who understand what's going on and who are paying attention. Take responsibility for your dooging it up.RoadDawg55 said:
Not really. A lot of half brains predicted 10+ wins. The schedule set up nicely. This season has been a failure so far. That's all I'm saying. Everyone knew this team had strengths and weaknesses and a championship was highly unlikely. You like to pretend you are right about everything, but according to you, we were going to lose to Cal and get plungered by ASU.MikeDamone said:Jesus. You're all over the fucking map. It's going to take a few more games. But by the middle to end of next year I belive we will see Petersen beginning to take the team to the next level. Any half brain with a computer knew this would be a hard year and next year will have ups and downs as well. Dumbfucks who bought into sark leaving "a full cupboard" and just add a winning coach would lead to 11 wins were dooging it up hard.
Lifpo
Here is what I said about ASU.
"I've watched all the UW games. 4 of them in person.
Late last night I watched oregon. with the benefit of 24 hours of perspective and a fast forward button.
If you think don't think UW has serious issues in several areas, I ask, do you watch UW games.
It's possible UW beats asu. That's why they play. Petersen could figure some stuff out. But they need to make some changes to win."
Saying this team was never capable of winning 10 games is ridiculous, they very might still win 9.
This season is a failure
Fuckin A people, this is serious doog/coog shit when we start talking about if not for this but for that they would have won.
Bottom line is they didn't. And the fucking offense did what we thought they would do and scored 3 points.
Wishing and hoping is a lot different than capable. So are possible and likely. Most everything is possible, but when the facts line up and you look at it, it's becomes unlikely.
Fuck, did DJ (ILTCHDJ) do something and somehow link this place to doogman?
-
You said it yourself they weren't playing for a championship this year. So by that standard TSIO. Who gives a shit how many wins you get unless you are going to be playing for something.
I really don't think Petersen's recruiting is going to be affected by his W/L record as much as you think it might. Really more interested in his player development than the 4/5 star kids he recruits. -
SunnyDodger said:
Please refrain from bringing perversion and the use of "I have beaten woman syndrome. " analogies that lessen the seriousness of domestic violence.
there is no need for " Yeah, if my aunt had a dick she would be my uncle" perversion especially if you want to bring it to the podcast. Otherwise you have good points, don't diminish them with the perversion that seems to be persistent in your analysis. I know you can make the points without it.
Fag alert. Sorry, can't make my point without using that term. -
You are completely missing the point. What you aren't getting is that Sark was blamed by you and all fans who weren't dumbasses for not winning 9 games. The team WAS capable of winning 9, Sark's ineptitude was the reason it didn't happen.MikeDamone said:
I think "there is no reason they couldn't beat ASU" was the call, right? Expect we all knew the offense is simply a mess. Barely D1 shit here.dhdawg said:
They were very capable of beating ASU, if the correct coaching adjustments were made and Petersen chose Lindquist and pounded them with the run all game, UW very well may have won that game.MikeDamone said:
It's not a failure to those who understand what's going on and who are paying attention. Take responsibility for your dooging it up.RoadDawg55 said:
Not really. A lot of half brains predicted 10+ wins. The schedule set up nicely. This season has been a failure so far. That's all I'm saying. Everyone knew this team had strengths and weaknesses and a championship was highly unlikely. You like to pretend you are right about everything, but according to you, we were going to lose to Cal and get plungered by ASU.MikeDamone said:Jesus. You're all over the fucking map. It's going to take a few more games. But by the middle to end of next year I belive we will see Petersen beginning to take the team to the next level. Any half brain with a computer knew this would be a hard year and next year will have ups and downs as well. Dumbfucks who bought into sark leaving "a full cupboard" and just add a winning coach would lead to 11 wins were dooging it up hard.
Lifpo
Here is what I said about ASU.
"I've watched all the UW games. 4 of them in person.
Late last night I watched oregon. with the benefit of 24 hours of perspective and a fast forward button.
If you think don't think UW has serious issues in several areas, I ask, do you watch UW games.
It's possible UW beats asu. That's why they play. Petersen could figure some stuff out. But they need to make some changes to win."
Saying this team was never capable of winning 10 games is ridiculous, they very might still win 9.
This season is a failure
Fuckin A people, this is serious doog/coog shit when we start talking about if not for this but for that they would have won.
Bottom line is they didn't. And the fucking offense did what we thought they would do and scored 3 points.
Wishing and hoping is a lot different than capable. So are possible and likely. Most everything is possible, but when the facts line up and you look at it, it's becomes unlikely.
Fuck, did DJ (ILTCHDJ) do something and somehow link this place to doogman?
In Sark's first season, you probably blamed him for losing to UCLA, Notre Dame, and ASU and rightfully so. Petersen loses close, but winnable games and the same people blaming Sark are making excuses for Petersen. Coaches are judged by wins or losses. Anyone can sit and say Petersen is building something (I think he will). People said the same about Sark. The only difference is their resumes. We are talking about this season. Obviously nobody will give a fuck about winning 7 or 9, or 10 in year one if he wins championships in year 3 or 4, but call it like it is. -
Did you take that as me guaranteeing a win over ASU? That certainly wasn't what I was saying.MikeDamone said:
I think "there is no reason they couldn't beat ASU" was the call, right? Expect we all knew the offense is simply a mess. Barely D1 shit here.dhdawg said:
They were very capable of beating ASU, if the correct coaching adjustments were made and Petersen chose Lindquist and pounded them with the run all game, UW very well may have won that game.MikeDamone said:
It's not a failure to those who understand what's going on and who are paying attention. Take responsibility for your dooging it up.RoadDawg55 said:
Not really. A lot of half brains predicted 10+ wins. The schedule set up nicely. This season has been a failure so far. That's all I'm saying. Everyone knew this team had strengths and weaknesses and a championship was highly unlikely. You like to pretend you are right about everything, but according to you, we were going to lose to Cal and get plungered by ASU.MikeDamone said:Jesus. You're all over the fucking map. It's going to take a few more games. But by the middle to end of next year I belive we will see Petersen beginning to take the team to the next level. Any half brain with a computer knew this would be a hard year and next year will have ups and downs as well. Dumbfucks who bought into sark leaving "a full cupboard" and just add a winning coach would lead to 11 wins were dooging it up hard.
Lifpo
Here is what I said about ASU.
"I've watched all the UW games. 4 of them in person.
Late last night I watched oregon. with the benefit of 24 hours of perspective and a fast forward button.
If you think don't think UW has serious issues in several areas, I ask, do you watch UW games.
It's possible UW beats asu. That's why they play. Petersen could figure some stuff out. But they need to make some changes to win."
Saying this team was never capable of winning 10 games is ridiculous, they very might still win 9.
This season is a failure
Fuckin A people, this is serious doog/coog shit when we start talking about if not for this but for that they would have won.
Bottom line is they didn't. And the fucking offense did what we thought they would do and scored 3 points.
Wishing and hoping is a lot different than capable. So are possible and likely. Most everything is possible, but when the facts line up and you look at it, it's becomes unlikely.
Fuck, did DJ (ILTCHDJ) do something and somehow link this place to doogman?
I predicted a win last week, not feeling very good about it. I just meant if we lose I wasn't going to make excuses for Petersen if that were to happen. It was a completely winnable game.
This team has enough talent not to be 12th in the pac-12 in offense, there is no excuse for them to be as bad as they are. Why is it not okay to have high expectations? -
I thought that 10 to 11 wins seemed like the right bar to set.
I had expectations that we'd get QB play at a comparable level to Price. That clearly hasn't happened.
I expected that our WR play to be reasonable. Between Kasen's injury and challenges at the QB position, this group has been a disappointment.
I expected that we'd have a next man up at RB like we did with Sankey when Polk left. Coleman and Washington are proving that there is a massive gap between Sankey and them.
I expected that the OL would continue growing year over year. Riva's injury has clearly hurt. With the difficult QB play, hard to really tell how much they have regressed versus getting overwhelmed at the LOS by people not respecting the pass.
I thought that the defense would be a top 3-4 defense in the conference. That's happened.
I thought that the kicking game would take a step back and I was actually very worried about what we'd get here. It's probably been better than I was expecting but it has hurt us with inconsistency.
It's easy to point fingers and say that people are moving the goal posts. I'm disappointed in the fact that I thought we'd have a better team. I definitely thought we'd have better QB play.
But when I look at this team right now, I see a team that is a 4-5 or 5-4 conference team. It just is what it is. It's an average at best team. Hard to put more lipstick on a pig than that.
I don't have a problem saying when I'm wrong. I was wrong thinking that our offense would be better. I'm not impressed at all with what I'm seeing out of the QB position. It's been shown time and time again that if you don't have competent QB play you can't win in this conference at a high level regardless of what you have around it. -
This. There seems to be a double standard here in regards to Petersen and sark. No one here made excuses when we lost by 3 to Stanford on the road a year ago, but it's okay to lose to ASU at home?RoadDawg55 said:
You are completely missing the point. What you aren't getting is that Sark was blamed by you and all fans who weren't dumbasses for not winning 9 games. In Sark's first, you blamed him for losing to UCLA, Notre Dame, and ASU. Petersen loses close, but winnable games and the same people blaming Sark are making excuses for Petersen. Coaches are judged by wins or losses. Anyone can sit and say Petersen is building something (I think he will). People said the same about Sark. The only difference is their resumes. We are talking about this season. Obviously nobody will give a fuck about winning 7 or 9, or 10 if he takes off in year 3 or 4, but call it like it is.MikeDamone said:
I think "there is no reason they couldn't beat ASU" was the call, right? Expect we all knew the offense is simply a mess. Barely D1 shit here.dhdawg said:
They were very capable of beating ASU, if the correct coaching adjustments were made and Petersen chose Lindquist and pounded them with the run all game, UW very well may have won that game.MikeDamone said:
It's not a failure to those who understand what's going on and who are paying attention. Take responsibility for your dooging it up.RoadDawg55 said:
Not really. A lot of half brains predicted 10+ wins. The schedule set up nicely. This season has been a failure so far. That's all I'm saying. Everyone knew this team had strengths and weaknesses and a championship was highly unlikely. You like to pretend you are right about everything, but according to you, we were going to lose to Cal and get plungered by ASU.MikeDamone said:Jesus. You're all over the fucking map. It's going to take a few more games. But by the middle to end of next year I belive we will see Petersen beginning to take the team to the next level. Any half brain with a computer knew this would be a hard year and next year will have ups and downs as well. Dumbfucks who bought into sark leaving "a full cupboard" and just add a winning coach would lead to 11 wins were dooging it up hard.
Lifpo
Here is what I said about ASU.
"I've watched all the UW games. 4 of them in person.
Late last night I watched oregon. with the benefit of 24 hours of perspective and a fast forward button.
If you think don't think UW has serious issues in several areas, I ask, do you watch UW games.
It's possible UW beats asu. That's why they play. Petersen could figure some stuff out. But they need to make some changes to win."
Saying this team was never capable of winning 10 games is ridiculous, they very might still win 9.
This season is a failure
Fuckin A people, this is serious doog/coog shit when we start talking about if not for this but for that they would have won.
Bottom line is they didn't. And the fucking offense did what we thought they would do and scored 3 points.
Wishing and hoping is a lot different than capable. So are possible and likely. Most everything is possible, but when the facts line up and you look at it, it's becomes unlikely.
Fuck, did DJ (ILTCHDJ) do something and somehow link this place to doogman? -
Year 5 Sark vs year 1 Petermandhdawg said:
This. There seems to be a double standard here in regards to Petersen and sark. No one here made excuses when we lost by 3 to Stanford on the road a year ago, but it's okay to lose to ASU at home?RoadDawg55 said:
You are completely missing the point. What you aren't getting is that Sark was blamed by you and all fans who weren't dumbasses for not winning 9 games. In Sark's first, you blamed him for losing to UCLA, Notre Dame, and ASU. Petersen loses close, but winnable games and the same people blaming Sark are making excuses for Petersen. Coaches are judged by wins or losses. Anyone can sit and say Petersen is building something (I think he will). People said the same about Sark. The only difference is their resumes. We are talking about this season. Obviously nobody will give a fuck about winning 7 or 9, or 10 if he takes off in year 3 or 4, but call it like it is.MikeDamone said:
I think "there is no reason they couldn't beat ASU" was the call, right? Expect we all knew the offense is simply a mess. Barely D1 shit here.dhdawg said:
They were very capable of beating ASU, if the correct coaching adjustments were made and Petersen chose Lindquist and pounded them with the run all game, UW very well may have won that game.MikeDamone said:
It's not a failure to those who understand what's going on and who are paying attention. Take responsibility for your dooging it up.RoadDawg55 said:
Not really. A lot of half brains predicted 10+ wins. The schedule set up nicely. This season has been a failure so far. That's all I'm saying. Everyone knew this team had strengths and weaknesses and a championship was highly unlikely. You like to pretend you are right about everything, but according to you, we were going to lose to Cal and get plungered by ASU.MikeDamone said:Jesus. You're all over the fucking map. It's going to take a few more games. But by the middle to end of next year I belive we will see Petersen beginning to take the team to the next level. Any half brain with a computer knew this would be a hard year and next year will have ups and downs as well. Dumbfucks who bought into sark leaving "a full cupboard" and just add a winning coach would lead to 11 wins were dooging it up hard.
Lifpo
Here is what I said about ASU.
"I've watched all the UW games. 4 of them in person.
Late last night I watched oregon. with the benefit of 24 hours of perspective and a fast forward button.
If you think don't think UW has serious issues in several areas, I ask, do you watch UW games.
It's possible UW beats asu. That's why they play. Petersen could figure some stuff out. But they need to make some changes to win."
Saying this team was never capable of winning 10 games is ridiculous, they very might still win 9.
This season is a failure
Fuckin A people, this is serious doog/coog shit when we start talking about if not for this but for that they would have won.
Bottom line is they didn't. And the fucking offense did what we thought they would do and scored 3 points.
Wishing and hoping is a lot different than capable. So are possible and likely. Most everything is possible, but when the facts line up and you look at it, it's becomes unlikely.
Fuck, did DJ (ILTCHDJ) do something and somehow link this place to doogman?
HTH. -
It was a dumb, single play, but it's part of this season's puzzle. If that was the only issue, things would be great.GrundleStiltzkin said:
Still coming back to that? Dumb single play, move on. It's the same as those fluffing Sark over "God's Play" at Cal.RoadDawg55 said:
It is a failure. It doesn't mean that Petersen is going to fail, but this season hasn't been a success. Pretty basic shit there Dimone.MikeDamone said:
It's not a failure to those who understand what's going on and who are paying attention. Take responsibility for your dooging it up.RoadDawg55 said:
Not really. A lot of half brains predicted 10+ wins. The schedule set up nicely. This season has been a failure so far. That's all I'm saying. Everyone knew this team had strengths and weaknesses and a championship was highly unlikely. You like to pretend you are right about everything, but according to you, we were going to lose to Cal and get plungered by ASU.MikeDamone said:Jesus. You're all over the fucking map. It's going to take a few more games. But by the middle to end of next year I belive we will see Petersen beginning to take the team to the next level. Any half brain with a computer knew this would be a hard year and next year will have ups and downs as well. Dumbfucks who bought into sark leaving "a full cupboard" and just add a winning coach would lead to 11 wins were dooging it up hard.
Lifpo
Worst offense in the PAC 12. The fake punt against Stanford. Many seem to blame the QB, the other talent, Sark, Smith. Some of this needs to be on Petersen. This team was capable of winning 10 games. -
This thread is fucking delivering.
-
Here's some year one perspective. Sark could have won against Notre Dame in 2009, but Ty didn't recruit good linemen to punch it in at the one. Sark could have won at ASU, but because Ty recruited so poorly, the young DB's messed up a crucial coverage at the end of the game. They will learn. Sark could have won at UCLA, but Jake made a fucktarded decision to go deep while driving for the winning score. It's not Sark's fault though, the team was 0-12 and Jake is still learning how to play QB because the old coaches failed him.CuntWaffle said:
Year 5 Sark vs year 1 Petermandhdawg said:
This. There seems to be a double standard here in regards to Petersen and sark. No one here made excuses when we lost by 3 to Stanford on the road a year ago, but it's okay to lose to ASU at home?RoadDawg55 said:
You are completely missing the point. What you aren't getting is that Sark was blamed by you and all fans who weren't dumbasses for not winning 9 games. In Sark's first, you blamed him for losing to UCLA, Notre Dame, and ASU. Petersen loses close, but winnable games and the same people blaming Sark are making excuses for Petersen. Coaches are judged by wins or losses. Anyone can sit and say Petersen is building something (I think he will). People said the same about Sark. The only difference is their resumes. We are talking about this season. Obviously nobody will give a fuck about winning 7 or 9, or 10 if he takes off in year 3 or 4, but call it like it is.MikeDamone said:
I think "there is no reason they couldn't beat ASU" was the call, right? Expect we all knew the offense is simply a mess. Barely D1 shit here.dhdawg said:
They were very capable of beating ASU, if the correct coaching adjustments were made and Petersen chose Lindquist and pounded them with the run all game, UW very well may have won that game.MikeDamone said:
It's not a failure to those who understand what's going on and who are paying attention. Take responsibility for your dooging it up.RoadDawg55 said:
Not really. A lot of half brains predicted 10+ wins. The schedule set up nicely. This season has been a failure so far. That's all I'm saying. Everyone knew this team had strengths and weaknesses and a championship was highly unlikely. You like to pretend you are right about everything, but according to you, we were going to lose to Cal and get plungered by ASU.MikeDamone said:Jesus. You're all over the fucking map. It's going to take a few more games. But by the middle to end of next year I belive we will see Petersen beginning to take the team to the next level. Any half brain with a computer knew this would be a hard year and next year will have ups and downs as well. Dumbfucks who bought into sark leaving "a full cupboard" and just add a winning coach would lead to 11 wins were dooging it up hard.
Lifpo
Here is what I said about ASU.
"I've watched all the UW games. 4 of them in person.
Late last night I watched oregon. with the benefit of 24 hours of perspective and a fast forward button.
If you think don't think UW has serious issues in several areas, I ask, do you watch UW games.
It's possible UW beats asu. That's why they play. Petersen could figure some stuff out. But they need to make some changes to win."
Saying this team was never capable of winning 10 games is ridiculous, they very might still win 9.
This season is a failure
Fuckin A people, this is serious doog/coog shit when we start talking about if not for this but for that they would have won.
Bottom line is they didn't. And the fucking offense did what we thought they would do and scored 3 points.
Wishing and hoping is a lot different than capable. So are possible and likely. Most everything is possible, but when the facts line up and you look at it, it's becomes unlikely.
Fuck, did DJ (ILTCHDJ) do something and somehow link this place to doogman?
HTH.
The halfbrains here mocked anyone who said any of those things, but they are some of Petersen's staunchest defenders. Petersen was a great hire, night and day compared to Sark and their resumes, and he may do big things here. If anything, expectations for Petersen should be higher because of that. Anyone can make excuses. Just fucking win. The Stanford and ASU games were games that could have been won with better coaching. Simple fact. -
I gave Sark a pass the first year. I never said sark was building anything. After 18 games in it was apparent he wasn't going to back up his yapper flapping.RoadDawg55 said:
You are completely missing the point. What you aren't getting is that Sark was blamed by you and all fans who weren't dumbasses for not winning 9 games. The team WAS capable of winning 9, Sark's ineptitude was the reason it didn't happen.MikeDamone said:
I think "there is no reason they couldn't beat ASU" was the call, right? Expect we all knew the offense is simply a mess. Barely D1 shit here.dhdawg said:
They were very capable of beating ASU, if the correct coaching adjustments were made and Petersen chose Lindquist and pounded them with the run all game, UW very well may have won that game.MikeDamone said:
It's not a failure to those who understand what's going on and who are paying attention. Take responsibility for your dooging it up.RoadDawg55 said:
Not really. A lot of half brains predicted 10+ wins. The schedule set up nicely. This season has been a failure so far. That's all I'm saying. Everyone knew this team had strengths and weaknesses and a championship was highly unlikely. You like to pretend you are right about everything, but according to you, we were going to lose to Cal and get plungered by ASU.MikeDamone said:Jesus. You're all over the fucking map. It's going to take a few more games. But by the middle to end of next year I belive we will see Petersen beginning to take the team to the next level. Any half brain with a computer knew this would be a hard year and next year will have ups and downs as well. Dumbfucks who bought into sark leaving "a full cupboard" and just add a winning coach would lead to 11 wins were dooging it up hard.
Lifpo
Here is what I said about ASU.
"I've watched all the UW games. 4 of them in person.
Late last night I watched oregon. with the benefit of 24 hours of perspective and a fast forward button.
If you think don't think UW has serious issues in several areas, I ask, do you watch UW games.
It's possible UW beats asu. That's why they play. Petersen could figure some stuff out. But they need to make some changes to win."
Saying this team was never capable of winning 10 games is ridiculous, they very might still win 9.
This season is a failure
Fuckin A people, this is serious doog/coog shit when we start talking about if not for this but for that they would have won.
Bottom line is they didn't. And the fucking offense did what we thought they would do and scored 3 points.
Wishing and hoping is a lot different than capable. So are possible and likely. Most everything is possible, but when the facts line up and you look at it, it's becomes unlikely.
Fuck, did DJ (ILTCHDJ) do something and somehow link this place to doogman?
In Sark's first season, you probably blamed him for losing to UCLA, Notre Dame, and ASU and rightfully so. Petersen loses close, but winnable games and the same people blaming Sark are making excuses for Petersen. Coaches are judged by wins or losses. Anyone can sit and say Petersen is building something (I think he will). People said the same about Sark. The only difference is their resumes. We are talking about this season. Obviously nobody will give a fuck about winning 7 or 9, or 10 in year one if he wins championships in year 3 or 4, but call it like it is.
Anyone can sit and say Peterson should win 11 games in the first year when most of the producers on offense left and after game fucking one it was apparent they weren't replaced. Those people are called doogs.
-
I was 21 in 2009 and was more worried about college tail and getting hammered than I was about UW football message boards so I was NOT a half brain back then.RoadDawg55 said:
Here's some year one perspective. Sark could have won against Notre Dame in 2009, but Ty didn't recruit good linemen to punch it in at the one. Sark could have won at ASU, but because Ty recruited so poorly, the young DB's messed up a crucial coverage at the end of the game. They will learn. Sark could have won at UCLA, but Jake made a fucktarded decision to go deep while driving for the winning score. It's not Sark's fault though, the team was 0-12 and Jake is still learning how to play QB because the old coaches failed him.CuntWaffle said:
Year 5 Sark vs year 1 Petermandhdawg said:
This. There seems to be a double standard here in regards to Petersen and sark. No one here made excuses when we lost by 3 to Stanford on the road a year ago, but it's okay to lose to ASU at home?RoadDawg55 said:
You are completely missing the point. What you aren't getting is that Sark was blamed by you and all fans who weren't dumbasses for not winning 9 games. In Sark's first, you blamed him for losing to UCLA, Notre Dame, and ASU. Petersen loses close, but winnable games and the same people blaming Sark are making excuses for Petersen. Coaches are judged by wins or losses. Anyone can sit and say Petersen is building something (I think he will). People said the same about Sark. The only difference is their resumes. We are talking about this season. Obviously nobody will give a fuck about winning 7 or 9, or 10 if he takes off in year 3 or 4, but call it like it is.MikeDamone said:
I think "there is no reason they couldn't beat ASU" was the call, right? Expect we all knew the offense is simply a mess. Barely D1 shit here.dhdawg said:
They were very capable of beating ASU, if the correct coaching adjustments were made and Petersen chose Lindquist and pounded them with the run all game, UW very well may have won that game.MikeDamone said:
It's not a failure to those who understand what's going on and who are paying attention. Take responsibility for your dooging it up.RoadDawg55 said:
Not really. A lot of half brains predicted 10+ wins. The schedule set up nicely. This season has been a failure so far. That's all I'm saying. Everyone knew this team had strengths and weaknesses and a championship was highly unlikely. You like to pretend you are right about everything, but according to you, we were going to lose to Cal and get plungered by ASU.MikeDamone said:Jesus. You're all over the fucking map. It's going to take a few more games. But by the middle to end of next year I belive we will see Petersen beginning to take the team to the next level. Any half brain with a computer knew this would be a hard year and next year will have ups and downs as well. Dumbfucks who bought into sark leaving "a full cupboard" and just add a winning coach would lead to 11 wins were dooging it up hard.
Lifpo
Here is what I said about ASU.
"I've watched all the UW games. 4 of them in person.
Late last night I watched oregon. with the benefit of 24 hours of perspective and a fast forward button.
If you think don't think UW has serious issues in several areas, I ask, do you watch UW games.
It's possible UW beats asu. That's why they play. Petersen could figure some stuff out. But they need to make some changes to win."
Saying this team was never capable of winning 10 games is ridiculous, they very might still win 9.
This season is a failure
Fuckin A people, this is serious doog/coog shit when we start talking about if not for this but for that they would have won.
Bottom line is they didn't. And the fucking offense did what we thought they would do and scored 3 points.
Wishing and hoping is a lot different than capable. So are possible and likely. Most everything is possible, but when the facts line up and you look at it, it's becomes unlikely.
Fuck, did DJ (ILTCHDJ) do something and somehow link this place to doogman?
HTH.
The halfbrains here mocked anyone who said any of those things, but they are some of Petersen's staunchest defenders. Petersen was a great hire, night and day compared to Sark and their resumes, and he may do big things here. If anything, expectations for Petersen should be higher because of that. Anyone can make excuses. Just fucking win. The Stanford and ASU games were games that could have been won with better coaching. Simple fact.
What should we do then since this season was a "failure" cry about it? Start screaming fire Peterman? Yea the losses have sucked but we have heard about how turning around this program wasn't going to be nearly as easy as everyone thought with Sark's mess.
I could kick, scream, and whine about how they haven't played perfect this year and ridicule CP non stop. Or I could LIPO like most people here said they were going to do but apparently that was completely not the case. -
Your first paragraph speaks to me, Cunt. I was in the same boat as you.CuntWaffle said:
I was 21 in 2009 and was more worried about college tail and getting hammered than I was about UW football message boards so I was NOT a half brain back then.RoadDawg55 said:
Here's some year one perspective. Sark could have won against Notre Dame in 2009, but Ty didn't recruit good linemen to punch it in at the one. Sark could have won at ASU, but because Ty recruited so poorly, the young DB's messed up a crucial coverage at the end of the game. They will learn. Sark could have won at UCLA, but Jake made a fucktarded decision to go deep while driving for the winning score. It's not Sark's fault though, the team was 0-12 and Jake is still learning how to play QB because the old coaches failed him.CuntWaffle said:
Year 5 Sark vs year 1 Petermandhdawg said:
This. There seems to be a double standard here in regards to Petersen and sark. No one here made excuses when we lost by 3 to Stanford on the road a year ago, but it's okay to lose to ASU at home?RoadDawg55 said:
You are completely missing the point. What you aren't getting is that Sark was blamed by you and all fans who weren't dumbasses for not winning 9 games. In Sark's first, you blamed him for losing to UCLA, Notre Dame, and ASU. Petersen loses close, but winnable games and the same people blaming Sark are making excuses for Petersen. Coaches are judged by wins or losses. Anyone can sit and say Petersen is building something (I think he will). People said the same about Sark. The only difference is their resumes. We are talking about this season. Obviously nobody will give a fuck about winning 7 or 9, or 10 if he takes off in year 3 or 4, but call it like it is.MikeDamone said:
I think "there is no reason they couldn't beat ASU" was the call, right? Expect we all knew the offense is simply a mess. Barely D1 shit here.dhdawg said:
They were very capable of beating ASU, if the correct coaching adjustments were made and Petersen chose Lindquist and pounded them with the run all game, UW very well may have won that game.MikeDamone said:
It's not a failure to those who understand what's going on and who are paying attention. Take responsibility for your dooging it up.RoadDawg55 said:
Not really. A lot of half brains predicted 10+ wins. The schedule set up nicely. This season has been a failure so far. That's all I'm saying. Everyone knew this team had strengths and weaknesses and a championship was highly unlikely. You like to pretend you are right about everything, but according to you, we were going to lose to Cal and get plungered by ASU.MikeDamone said:Jesus. You're all over the fucking map. It's going to take a few more games. But by the middle to end of next year I belive we will see Petersen beginning to take the team to the next level. Any half brain with a computer knew this would be a hard year and next year will have ups and downs as well. Dumbfucks who bought into sark leaving "a full cupboard" and just add a winning coach would lead to 11 wins were dooging it up hard.
Lifpo
Here is what I said about ASU.
"I've watched all the UW games. 4 of them in person.
Late last night I watched oregon. with the benefit of 24 hours of perspective and a fast forward button.
If you think don't think UW has serious issues in several areas, I ask, do you watch UW games.
It's possible UW beats asu. That's why they play. Petersen could figure some stuff out. But they need to make some changes to win."
Saying this team was never capable of winning 10 games is ridiculous, they very might still win 9.
This season is a failure
Fuckin A people, this is serious doog/coog shit when we start talking about if not for this but for that they would have won.
Bottom line is they didn't. And the fucking offense did what we thought they would do and scored 3 points.
Wishing and hoping is a lot different than capable. So are possible and likely. Most everything is possible, but when the facts line up and you look at it, it's becomes unlikely.
Fuck, did DJ (ILTCHDJ) do something and somehow link this place to doogman?
HTH.
The halfbrains here mocked anyone who said any of those things, but they are some of Petersen's staunchest defenders. Petersen was a great hire, night and day compared to Sark and their resumes, and he may do big things here. If anything, expectations for Petersen should be higher because of that. Anyone can make excuses. Just fucking win. The Stanford and ASU games were games that could have been won with better coaching. Simple fact.
What should we do then since this season was a "failure" cry about it? Start screaming fire Peterman? Yea the losses have sucked but we have heard about how turning around this program wasn't going to be nearly as easy as everyone thought with Sark's mess.
I could kick, scream, and whine about how they haven't played perfect this year and ridicule CP non stop. Or I could LIPO like most people here said they were going to do but apparently that was completely not the case.
The rest of it. Christ Cunt. You sound like a guy who posts on another site that talks about punching a hole in the keyboard. We are all LIPO. We know Petersen will get time. Nobody is ridiculing him. Wins get praised. Losses get over analyzed and criticized. Isn't that what message boards are for? -
I never said that you said Sark was building something. Many idiots did. Being a doog is bitching about an offense that is the worst in the conference? Talent isn't the only reason why. Who is and isn't a doog and what makes one a doog always changes here.MikeDamone said:
I gave Sark a pass the first year. I never said sark was building anything. After 18 games in it was apparent he wasn't going to back up his yapper flapping.RoadDawg55 said:
You are completely missing the point. What you aren't getting is that Sark was blamed by you and all fans who weren't dumbasses for not winning 9 games. The team WAS capable of winning 9, Sark's ineptitude was the reason it didn't happen.MikeDamone said:
I think "there is no reason they couldn't beat ASU" was the call, right? Expect we all knew the offense is simply a mess. Barely D1 shit here.dhdawg said:
They were very capable of beating ASU, if the correct coaching adjustments were made and Petersen chose Lindquist and pounded them with the run all game, UW very well may have won that game.MikeDamone said:
It's not a failure to those who understand what's going on and who are paying attention. Take responsibility for your dooging it up.RoadDawg55 said:
Not really. A lot of half brains predicted 10+ wins. The schedule set up nicely. This season has been a failure so far. That's all I'm saying. Everyone knew this team had strengths and weaknesses and a championship was highly unlikely. You like to pretend you are right about everything, but according to you, we were going to lose to Cal and get plungered by ASU.MikeDamone said:Jesus. You're all over the fucking map. It's going to take a few more games. But by the middle to end of next year I belive we will see Petersen beginning to take the team to the next level. Any half brain with a computer knew this would be a hard year and next year will have ups and downs as well. Dumbfucks who bought into sark leaving "a full cupboard" and just add a winning coach would lead to 11 wins were dooging it up hard.
Lifpo
Here is what I said about ASU.
"I've watched all the UW games. 4 of them in person.
Late last night I watched oregon. with the benefit of 24 hours of perspective and a fast forward button.
If you think don't think UW has serious issues in several areas, I ask, do you watch UW games.
It's possible UW beats asu. That's why they play. Petersen could figure some stuff out. But they need to make some changes to win."
Saying this team was never capable of winning 10 games is ridiculous, they very might still win 9.
This season is a failure
Fuckin A people, this is serious doog/coog shit when we start talking about if not for this but for that they would have won.
Bottom line is they didn't. And the fucking offense did what we thought they would do and scored 3 points.
Wishing and hoping is a lot different than capable. So are possible and likely. Most everything is possible, but when the facts line up and you look at it, it's becomes unlikely.
Fuck, did DJ (ILTCHDJ) do something and somehow link this place to doogman?
In Sark's first season, you probably blamed him for losing to UCLA, Notre Dame, and ASU and rightfully so. Petersen loses close, but winnable games and the same people blaming Sark are making excuses for Petersen. Coaches are judged by wins or losses. Anyone can sit and say Petersen is building something (I think he will). People said the same about Sark. The only difference is their resumes. We are talking about this season. Obviously nobody will give a fuck about winning 7 or 9, or 10 in year one if he wins championships in year 3 or 4, but call it like it is.
Anyone can sit and say Peterson should win 11 games in the first year when most of the producers on offense left and after game fucking one it was apparent they weren't replaced. Those people are called doogs. -
I just don't see how already being pessimistic for the future or saying "I am starting to wonder if Petersen is the coach we were looking for" or "Sark would have done better this year" (note that I am not saying you said these things, just a few posts I saw since Saturday) is LIPO... because it isn't. It is overreacting and not LIPO.RoadDawg55 said:
Your first paragraph speaks to me, Cunt. I was in the same boat as you.CuntWaffle said:
I was 21 in 2009 and was more worried about college tail and getting hammered than I was about UW football message boards so I was NOT a half brain back then.RoadDawg55 said:
Here's some year one perspective. Sark could have won against Notre Dame in 2009, but Ty didn't recruit good linemen to punch it in at the one. Sark could have won at ASU, but because Ty recruited so poorly, the young DB's messed up a crucial coverage at the end of the game. They will learn. Sark could have won at UCLA, but Jake made a fucktarded decision to go deep while driving for the winning score. It's not Sark's fault though, the team was 0-12 and Jake is still learning how to play QB because the old coaches failed him.CuntWaffle said:
Year 5 Sark vs year 1 Petermandhdawg said:
This. There seems to be a double standard here in regards to Petersen and sark. No one here made excuses when we lost by 3 to Stanford on the road a year ago, but it's okay to lose to ASU at home?RoadDawg55 said:
You are completely missing the point. What you aren't getting is that Sark was blamed by you and all fans who weren't dumbasses for not winning 9 games. In Sark's first, you blamed him for losing to UCLA, Notre Dame, and ASU. Petersen loses close, but winnable games and the same people blaming Sark are making excuses for Petersen. Coaches are judged by wins or losses. Anyone can sit and say Petersen is building something (I think he will). People said the same about Sark. The only difference is their resumes. We are talking about this season. Obviously nobody will give a fuck about winning 7 or 9, or 10 if he takes off in year 3 or 4, but call it like it is.MikeDamone said:
I think "there is no reason they couldn't beat ASU" was the call, right? Expect we all knew the offense is simply a mess. Barely D1 shit here.dhdawg said:
They were very capable of beating ASU, if the correct coaching adjustments were made and Petersen chose Lindquist and pounded them with the run all game, UW very well may have won that game.MikeDamone said:
It's not a failure to those who understand what's going on and who are paying attention. Take responsibility for your dooging it up.RoadDawg55 said:
Not really. A lot of half brains predicted 10+ wins. The schedule set up nicely. This season has been a failure so far. That's all I'm saying. Everyone knew this team had strengths and weaknesses and a championship was highly unlikely. You like to pretend you are right about everything, but according to you, we were going to lose to Cal and get plungered by ASU.MikeDamone said:Jesus. You're all over the fucking map. It's going to take a few more games. But by the middle to end of next year I belive we will see Petersen beginning to take the team to the next level. Any half brain with a computer knew this would be a hard year and next year will have ups and downs as well. Dumbfucks who bought into sark leaving "a full cupboard" and just add a winning coach would lead to 11 wins were dooging it up hard.
Lifpo
Here is what I said about ASU.
"I've watched all the UW games. 4 of them in person.
Late last night I watched oregon. with the benefit of 24 hours of perspective and a fast forward button.
If you think don't think UW has serious issues in several areas, I ask, do you watch UW games.
It's possible UW beats asu. That's why they play. Petersen could figure some stuff out. But they need to make some changes to win."
Saying this team was never capable of winning 10 games is ridiculous, they very might still win 9.
This season is a failure
Fuckin A people, this is serious doog/coog shit when we start talking about if not for this but for that they would have won.
Bottom line is they didn't. And the fucking offense did what we thought they would do and scored 3 points.
Wishing and hoping is a lot different than capable. So are possible and likely. Most everything is possible, but when the facts line up and you look at it, it's becomes unlikely.
Fuck, did DJ (ILTCHDJ) do something and somehow link this place to doogman?
HTH.
The halfbrains here mocked anyone who said any of those things, but they are some of Petersen's staunchest defenders. Petersen was a great hire, night and day compared to Sark and their resumes, and he may do big things here. If anything, expectations for Petersen should be higher because of that. Anyone can make excuses. Just fucking win. The Stanford and ASU games were games that could have been won with better coaching. Simple fact.
What should we do then since this season was a "failure" cry about it? Start screaming fire Peterman? Yea the losses have sucked but we have heard about how turning around this program wasn't going to be nearly as easy as everyone thought with Sark's mess.
I could kick, scream, and whine about how they haven't played perfect this year and ridicule CP non stop. Or I could LIPO like most people here said they were going to do but apparently that was completely not the case.
The rest of it. Christ Cunt. You sound like a guy who posts on another site that talks about punching a hole in the keyboard. We are all LIPO. We know Petersen will get time. Nobody is ridiculing him. Wins get praised. Losses get over analyzed and criticized. Isn't that what message boards are for? -
Don't know about you guys but I'm just enjoying going to the games on crisp Fall afternoon nights with my two dads, getting plastered and somehow making it back by 1am. Special!
-
While you doogs were getting "boners in your sweatpants" over Petersen...what did I say? Day 1 I said LIPO. We will know after 18 games. I might extend that a couple depending on the schedule, but roughly two years is enough to know. So far a pattern of bad coaching hasn't emerged.
-
Really - Maybe not 12th, but certainly 10th or 11th. I am pressed to think of a team I would wouldn't trade offenses with player for player with no cherry picking. Maybe OSU.dhdawg said:
Did you take that as me guaranteeing a win over ASU? That certainly wasn't what I was saying.MikeDamone said:
I think "there is no reason they couldn't beat ASU" was the call, right? Expect we all knew the offense is simply a mess. Barely D1 shit here.dhdawg said:
They were very capable of beating ASU, if the correct coaching adjustments were made and Petersen chose Lindquist and pounded them with the run all game, UW very well may have won that game.MikeDamone said:
It's not a failure to those who understand what's going on and who are paying attention. Take responsibility for your dooging it up.RoadDawg55 said:
Not really. A lot of half brains predicted 10+ wins. The schedule set up nicely. This season has been a failure so far. That's all I'm saying. Everyone knew this team had strengths and weaknesses and a championship was highly unlikely. You like to pretend you are right about everything, but according to you, we were going to lose to Cal and get plungered by ASU.MikeDamone said:Jesus. You're all over the fucking map. It's going to take a few more games. But by the middle to end of next year I belive we will see Petersen beginning to take the team to the next level. Any half brain with a computer knew this would be a hard year and next year will have ups and downs as well. Dumbfucks who bought into sark leaving "a full cupboard" and just add a winning coach would lead to 11 wins were dooging it up hard.
Lifpo
Here is what I said about ASU.
"I've watched all the UW games. 4 of them in person.
Late last night I watched oregon. with the benefit of 24 hours of perspective and a fast forward button.
If you think don't think UW has serious issues in several areas, I ask, do you watch UW games.
It's possible UW beats asu. That's why they play. Petersen could figure some stuff out. But they need to make some changes to win."
Saying this team was never capable of winning 10 games is ridiculous, they very might still win 9.
This season is a failure
Fuckin A people, this is serious doog/coog shit when we start talking about if not for this but for that they would have won.
Bottom line is they didn't. And the fucking offense did what we thought they would do and scored 3 points.
Wishing and hoping is a lot different than capable. So are possible and likely. Most everything is possible, but when the facts line up and you look at it, it's becomes unlikely.
Fuck, did DJ (ILTCHDJ) do something and somehow link this place to doogman?
I predicted a win last week, not feeling very good about it. I just meant if we lose I wasn't going to make excuses for Petersen if that were to happen. It was a completely winnable game.
This team has enough talent not to be 12th in the pac-12 in offense, there is no excuse for them to be as bad as they are. Why is it not okay to have high expectations?
I never said you guaranteed a win...you said there was "no reason" they couldn't win, when in fact, there were several reasons that made a win very unlikely. -
What does he need to do in those 18 games then? cause next year is likely going to be another step backMikeDamone said:While you doogs were getting "boners in your sweatpants" over Petersen...what did I say? Day 1 I said LIPO. We will know after 18 games. I might extend that a couple depending on the schedule, but roughly two years is enough to know. So far a pattern of bad coaching hasn't emerged.
-
Guilty as charged. I also predicted, at least sorely wanted, 10 wins.MikeDamone said:While you doogs were getting "boners in your sweatpants" over Petersen...what did I say? Day 1 I said LIPO. We will know after 18 games. I might extend that a couple depending on the schedule, but roughly two years is enough to know. So far a pattern of bad coaching hasn't emerged.
But I don't give a fuck. The guy comes here with probably the best coaching resume in modern UW history. Race can me what Dobie came with. -
dhdawg said:
This. There seems to be a double standard here in regards to Petersen and sark. No one here made excuses when we lost by 3 to Stanford on the road a year ago, but it's okay to lose to ASU at home?RoadDawg55 said:
You are completely missing the point. What you aren't getting is that Sark was blamed by you and all fans who weren't dumbasses for not winning 9 games. In Sark's first, you blamed him for losing to UCLA, Notre Dame, and ASU. Petersen loses close, but winnable games and the same people blaming Sark are making excuses for Petersen. Coaches are judged by wins or losses. Anyone can sit and say Petersen is building something (I think he will). People said the same about Sark. The only difference is their resumes. We are talking about this season. Obviously nobody will give a fuck about winning 7 or 9, or 10 if he takes off in year 3 or 4, but call it like it is.MikeDamone said:
I think "there is no reason they couldn't beat ASU" was the call, right? Expect we all knew the offense is simply a mess. Barely D1 shit here.dhdawg said:
They were very capable of beating ASU, if the correct coaching adjustments were made and Petersen chose Lindquist and pounded them with the run all game, UW very well may have won that game.MikeDamone said:
It's not a failure to those who understand what's going on and who are paying attention. Take responsibility for your dooging it up.RoadDawg55 said:
Not really. A lot of half brains predicted 10+ wins. The schedule set up nicely. This season has been a failure so far. That's all I'm saying. Everyone knew this team had strengths and weaknesses and a championship was highly unlikely. You like to pretend you are right about everything, but according to you, we were going to lose to Cal and get plungered by ASU.MikeDamone said:Jesus. You're all over the fucking map. It's going to take a few more games. But by the middle to end of next year I belive we will see Petersen beginning to take the team to the next level. Any half brain with a computer knew this would be a hard year and next year will have ups and downs as well. Dumbfucks who bought into sark leaving "a full cupboard" and just add a winning coach would lead to 11 wins were dooging it up hard.
Lifpo
Here is what I said about ASU.
"I've watched all the UW games. 4 of them in person.
Late last night I watched oregon. with the benefit of 24 hours of perspective and a fast forward button.
If you think don't think UW has serious issues in several areas, I ask, do you watch UW games.
It's possible UW beats asu. That's why they play. Petersen could figure some stuff out. But they need to make some changes to win."
Saying this team was never capable of winning 10 games is ridiculous, they very might still win 9.
This season is a failure
Fuckin A people, this is serious doog/coog shit when we start talking about if not for this but for that they would have won.
Bottom line is they didn't. And the fucking offense did what we thought they would do and scored 3 points.
Wishing and hoping is a lot different than capable. So are possible and likely. Most everything is possible, but when the facts line up and you look at it, it's becomes unlikely.
Fuck, did DJ (ILTCHDJ) do something and somehow link this place to doogman?
No loses are OK. The offense is bad. However, I don't see that as Petersen's stamp on the program just yet. But I'm not going to act like a bitch about Petersen in year one. Just as I didn't with sark. He had his 18 games before I went nuts on him. I mocked people that praised him based on kick as pressers and all that shit. If anything else, Petersen makes me feel like there is a plan in place and he doesn't need to get out there every week and blow smoke up peoples asses and a bunch of raw raw dancing around and gimmicks. I thought the chances of Sark actually figuring it out were about 18%. With Petersen I put it at 81% -
With that OOC schedule I saw no reason not to expect 6-3 in conference and 10 wins overall, which would be the equivalent to 8-9 wins with a normal OOC schedule.
As it stands now, I would be "happy" with 8 wins but would consider the season a disappointment.
But logic dictates that we couldn't ask for a better leader than Petersen, so I'm LIPO for now. -
I never anticipated that our RBs and QB play would be wretched, and that Kasen for whatever reason would be a non-factor.
-
What fucking talent on offense do people keep reffering to besides John Ross?
-
RoadDawg55 said:
I never said that you said Sark was building something. Many idiots did. Being a doog is bitching about an offense that is the worst in the conference? Talent isn't the only reason why. Who is and isn't a doog and what makes one a doog always changes here.MikeDamone said:
I gave Sark a pass the first year. I never said sark was building anything. After 18 games in it was apparent he wasn't going to back up his yapper flapping.RoadDawg55 said:
You are completely missing the point. What you aren't getting is that Sark was blamed by you and all fans who weren't dumbasses for not winning 9 games. The team WAS capable of winning 9, Sark's ineptitude was the reason it didn't happen.MikeDamone said:
I think "there is no reason they couldn't beat ASU" was the call, right? Expect we all knew the offense is simply a mess. Barely D1 shit here.dhdawg said:
They were very capable of beating ASU, if the correct coaching adjustments were made and Petersen chose Lindquist and pounded them with the run all game, UW very well may have won that game.MikeDamone said:
It's not a failure to those who understand what's going on and who are paying attention. Take responsibility for your dooging it up.RoadDawg55 said:
Not really. A lot of half brains predicted 10+ wins. The schedule set up nicely. This season has been a failure so far. That's all I'm saying. Everyone knew this team had strengths and weaknesses and a championship was highly unlikely. You like to pretend you are right about everything, but according to you, we were going to lose to Cal and get plungered by ASU.MikeDamone said:Jesus. You're all over the fucking map. It's going to take a few more games. But by the middle to end of next year I belive we will see Petersen beginning to take the team to the next level. Any half brain with a computer knew this would be a hard year and next year will have ups and downs as well. Dumbfucks who bought into sark leaving "a full cupboard" and just add a winning coach would lead to 11 wins were dooging it up hard.
Lifpo
Here is what I said about ASU.
"I've watched all the UW games. 4 of them in person.
Late last night I watched oregon. with the benefit of 24 hours of perspective and a fast forward button.
If you think don't think UW has serious issues in several areas, I ask, do you watch UW games.
It's possible UW beats asu. That's why they play. Petersen could figure some stuff out. But they need to make some changes to win."
Saying this team was never capable of winning 10 games is ridiculous, they very might still win 9.
This season is a failure
Fuckin A people, this is serious doog/coog shit when we start talking about if not for this but for that they would have won.
Bottom line is they didn't. And the fucking offense did what we thought they would do and scored 3 points.
Wishing and hoping is a lot different than capable. So are possible and likely. Most everything is possible, but when the facts line up and you look at it, it's becomes unlikely.
Fuck, did DJ (ILTCHDJ) do something and somehow link this place to doogman?
In Sark's first season, you probably blamed him for losing to UCLA, Notre Dame, and ASU and rightfully so. Petersen loses close, but winnable games and the same people blaming Sark are making excuses for Petersen. Coaches are judged by wins or losses. Anyone can sit and say Petersen is building something (I think he will). People said the same about Sark. The only difference is their resumes. We are talking about this season. Obviously nobody will give a fuck about winning 7 or 9, or 10 in year one if he wins championships in year 3 or 4, but call it like it is.
Anyone can sit and say Peterson should win 11 games in the first year when most of the producers on offense left and after game fucking one it was apparent they weren't replaced. Those people are called doogs.
beat oregon? Nothing else matters.dhdawg said:
What does he need to do in those 18 games then? cause next year is likely going to be another step backMikeDamone said:While you doogs were getting "boners in your sweatpants" over Petersen...what did I say? Day 1 I said LIPO. We will know after 18 games. I might extend that a couple depending on the schedule, but roughly two years is enough to know. So far a pattern of bad coaching hasn't emerged.
It will be interesting to see what assistants are gone next year. No warning, just gone. It will also be interesting to see what players are gone. I don't necessarily agree that next year will be a step back. This team, has a few talented individuals, but not a lot of playing like a team. The sum needs to be greater than the parts. Getting them to play as a team and have everyone give 100% on every play will change a lot of things. We have seen that at UCLA for years. Great players and average teams...
There is a lot of sark stench out there still that rewards individual effort, but not playing like a cohesive unit. I would say if they don't take a step back next year, that would be a big accomplishment.
I am by no means pessimistic about the future like some of you are. -
it's time to just sit back and enjoy each fall afternoon for what it is.
-
I didn't think they would be 3 or 6 points a game bad, but I thought they would be bottom 1/3 of the league.DerekJohnson said:I never anticipated that our RBs and QB play would be wretched, and that Kasen for whatever reason would be a non-factor.
-
Jesus, this thread is going in circles. Doog myth 1: Sark sucked at coaching but was good enough at recruiting to leave a "full" cupboard for Petersen. I bought into that shit for sure. It was false, Petersen needed his own recruits to fill out the D to be good, offense just doesn't have the personnel to compete for the conference. Even wildSwede wouldn't do it.
Doog myth 2: Petersen should be expected to come in and turn this thing around in a short amount of time. I bought into this one too. This is also false. Go look at Petersen's philosophy; unfortunately it's not a quick fix like getting skill guys and bubble screening to 7 wins. It's an arduous process of building the lines and tough sob's who live/eat/breathe football.
And who gives a shit who's a doog and who's not at this point? This isn't dawgman or dawgpound, so who gives a fuck? We were all excited for this coach to come in, except maybe a few. We'll be fine in the long run. These coogs and quooks can suck a dick about the 'Payday Peeth' shit. -
I was doogin' it up pre-season, I fully admit that. I was thinking 10 wins was pretty much guaranteed.
I think I had so much blood going to my groin area after the hire and all pre-season that I kinda lost track of things. I overvalued the coaching upgrade, and undervalued GREATLY how a coaching change can set a team back a bit and also how much talent we lost on offense.
My long term expectation for the program have not changed one bit. I still expect us to be one of the top programs on the west coast in the next 3 years. Not much has changed in that way for me.
