Maybe Peterman is What You Want Helfrich To Be
Comments
-
RaceBannon said:
What safety net?
You were the guy who thinks that Youngs. Rodgers and Mariotas grow on trees.RaceBannon said:
Masoli was fine on the field and Oregon is a great organization like the Packers and the old Niners. Of course that concept is an outlier to a coog.salemcoog said:
Me, laptops and your overrating of Jeremiah Masoli are havin a little snicker over that gem.RaceBannon said:
I could have listed every Oregon qb since 2007 insteadsalemcoog said:RaceBannon said:Helfrich and Coker are different. This isnt Chip's roster. Coker took over a returning juggernaut. Other than Fife not being better than Harrington Oregon always comes up with a QB. Mariota is a system QB. Maybe the best ever but not irreplaceable. Rogers replaced Farve and Young replaced Montana.
Helfrich has proved a lot this year. Petersen hasn't. But AZ is also right in that no one was turning uw in one year.
Petersen has to do something next year to give us hope. Like finding a fucking QB that can play. And actually changing the loser culture even if they lose 4 or 5 games again
I Iike to point to extreme outliers like Montana to Young and Favre to Rodgers as if this happens everyday.
It's what I like to do.
And then when pointed and laughed at, you say that Oregon's QB's have gotten better year after year since '07.
And then when shown the error of your ways there. You use comparisons to the Niners and Packer organizations and how a Coog wouldn't know what a good organization looks like.
All the while inferring that YOU do, because you had a good program 23 years ago.
As a Packer fan for the last 25 years, I think I'm more familiar with what a good organization looks like. More than an 'ol Duckfighter. -
I didn't say any of that but good effort good job anyway
-
Peterman, its still not easy to know if he will succeed. Actually, by one of my better metrics, his first year is better than any of Sarks, believe it or not. Next year will tell us a lot, we should know by next season whether he is what we thought he could be. Starting with the QB situation.
Helfrich, I also don't know what to think. It's possible that Chip revamped the whole org and it will keep going at its current pace. I think the more likely outcome is they end up somewhere between the latter Bellotti era and the Chip era for a few years after Mariota graduates. Chip was a special coach, probably the best in the pac in the past decade with Harbaugh behind Carroll. They hired from within to try and eliminate as much shakeup as they could, don't rock the casbah. (Insert "I'm surprised that you're surprised that they are succeeding"). I don't think they will fall to pre -94 level anytime soon. -
What do you have against kids that have urinated off of hotel balconies?AZDuck said:
Yet, under Peterman, this kid rode the pine behind Joe fucking Southwick, who, as you may recall from your games against Boise, sucks. -
Muttzen said:
Peterman, its still not easy to know if he will succeed. Actually, by one of my better metrics, his first year is better than any of Sarks, believe it or not. Next year will tell us a lot, we should know by next season whether he is what we thought he could be. Starting with the QB situation.
Helfrich, I also don't know what to think. It's possible that Chip revamped the whole org Petand it will keep going at its current pace. I think the more likely outcome is they end up somewhere between the latter Bellotti era and the Chip era for a few years after Mariota graduates. Chip was a special coach, probably the best in the pac in the past decade with Harbaugh behind Carroll. They hired from within to try and eliminate as much shakeup as they could, don't rock the casbah. (Insert "I'm surprised that you're surprised that they are succeeding"). I don't think they will fall to pre -94 level anytime soon.
So... taking a team from 0-12 to 7-6 is less than taking a 9-4 team with a gimme 4-0, to 8-6?
While Chip Kelly didn't accomplish as much as Carroll did in his time at Oregon, I'd have to say that he is the most influential coach of the last 15 years.
Half of the FBS, if not more, is trying to run some sort of version of his offense. Even Alabama runs a no huddle these days.
You never know these things, but I think Kelly would have accomplished everything that Carroll did if he stuck around a few more years. -
It's a little more complicated than that, I analyzed the pac-12 games only in terms of score differential. It actually came out fairly well (teams that you think would be good were, teams that looked bad were bad). I haven't finished labeling some of these yet.salemcoog said:
So... taking a team from 0-12 to 7-6 is less than taking a 9-4 team with a gimme 4-0, to 8-6?
While Chip Kelly didn't accomplish as much as Carroll did in his time at Oregon, I'd have to say that he is the most influential coach of the last 15 years.
Half of the FBS, if not more, is trying to run some sort of version of his offense. Even Alabama runs a no huddle these days.
You never know these things, but I think Kelly would have accomplished everything that Carroll did if he stuck around a few more years.
For UW, it came out like...
Blue is weighted points for in pac 12 games, red is weighted points against. Formula was designed to eliminate outliers performances, good and bad.
Owen 12 wasn't an accurate measure of talent so much as it was a measure of the DGAF in the program.
Also, the first year alone isn't very good to judge a coach. If we expect Peterman to eventually be a Harbaugh, etc level coach, we should see improvement next year, regardless of losing players.
-
Stanford... the best season were with Luck. You can see the improvement starting in Harbaugh's second year, even though they weren't good yet.
-
Like Rich Rod?Mosster47 said:Well all we know for certain is Boise is still doing what they've been doing since the late 90's and UW is still doing what they've been doing since the late 90's.
Nothing is concrete yet, but it's fair to assume Peterman is a system coach.
:-* -
-
Kinda like wins and lossesTierbsHsotBoobs said:
