I like to say that a coach was only good because of his QB during a historic run of success that many other programs couldn't match.
I like to ignore that the coach still does a lot of other shit like: recruit the QB, Hire the coaches, Instill the culture, develop a nasty defense, recruit other players besides QB, etc.
If the QB was the only thing that mattered in football, Cal would be the favorite in the conference this year.
Petersen may suck here, but anyone can suck anywhere, it doesn't discredit what he did at Boise.
Not to mention that savior QB, wasn't highly drafted and hasn't done anything in the league, if he's still there.
But still
Kellen Moore was good, but he's not fucking John Elway.
what those teams had was awesome DL and DB play, as well as play action. which isn't anything unless you have a formidable running game.
kellen was definitely a game manager, and was very accurate, but he wasn't a one man show.
They also had Austin Pettis (WR), Titus Young (WR), Doug Martin (RB). Man, what a loaded team.
I thought it was a decent article. Sure it had an agenda and had some inaccuracies, but spouting off 92-12 without any context gets annoying. And we have read plenty of those articles. One day we will hopefully get a truly balanced article. I doubt it, but I can hope.
Petersen certainly achieved more than the previous Boise State coaches, but the fact is all three of the guys before him also moved on to BCS jobs and Petersen inherited a program that was already rolling. And it will roll after him as well. Boise State had the top talent in their league(s). That will never happen at UW and he inherited a middle of the pack team with the goal of taking it to the top.
His offenses have been significantly worse since Kellen Moore graduated. And the style has changed as well. On one hand, it's common sense that an offense gets worse after losing a QB that puts up Kellen Moore numbers. Otoh, it's been a steep decline and if you aren't concerned by it, you're either a huge doog or you are a genius. I'd lean more towards huge doog though. Five years ago, I would have listed Petersen in the top couple offensive coaches. Could anyone honestly say the same in 2015?
He's bringing discipline to a program that needs it. He's developed many lowly rated recruits into NFL players. If he can put together a Boise in it's prime team with a few four and five star guys we should be in business. That's why I don't freak out too much over the recruits that look shitty on paper. He still has a lot of positive attributes, including his past resume.
I'm not as excited about Petersen as I was when he was hired, but it was only one season. He was a great hire and he will get his chance to prove his worth.
I thought it was a decent article. Sure it had an agenda and had some inaccuracies, but spouting off 92-12 without any context gets annoying. And we have read plenty of those articles. One day we will hopefully get a truly balanced article. I doubt it, but I can hope.
Petersen certainly achieved more than the previous Boise State coaches, but the fact is all three of the guys before him also moved on to BCS jobs and Petersen inherited a program that was already rolling. And it will roll after him as well. Boise State had the top talent in their league(s). That will never happen at UW and he inherited a middle of the pack team with the goal of taking it to the top.
His offenses have been significantly worse since Kellen Moore graduated. And the style has changed as well. On one hand, it's common sense that an offense gets worse after losing a QB that puts up Kellen Moore numbers. Otoh, it's been a steep decline and if you aren't concerned by it, you're either a huge doog or you are a genius. I'd lean more towards huge doog though. Five years ago, I would have listed Petersen in the top couple offensive coaches. Could anyone honestly say the same in 2015?
He's bringing discipline to a program that needs it. He's developed many lowly rated recruits into NFL players. If he can put together a Boise in it's prime team with a few four and five star guys we should be in business. That's why I don't freak out too much over the recruits that look shitty on paper. He still has a lot of positive attributes, including his past resume.
I'm not as excited about Petersen as I was when he was hired, but it was only one season. He was a great hire and he will get his chance to prove his worth.
If the only two time Bear Bryant award winning coach cant bring the huskies above what Sark made the program into, just turn the football stadium into another hospital.
You know that's what gives the hedge fund buddies a chub anyawys.
If the only two time Bear Bryant award winning coach cant bring the huskies above what Sark made the program into, just turn the football stadium into another hospital.
You know that's what gives the hedge fund buddies a chub anyawys.
I like to say that a coach was only good because of his QB during a historic run of success that many other programs couldn't match.
I like to ignore that the coach still does a lot of other shit like: recruit the QB, Hire the coaches, Instill the culture, develop a nasty defense, recruit other players besides QB, etc.
If the QB was the only thing that mattered in football, Cal would be the favorite in the conference this year.
Petersen may suck here, but anyone can suck anywhere, it doesn't discredit what he did at Boise.
Not to mention that savior QB, wasn't highly drafted and hasn't done anything in the league, if he's still there.
But still
The fact that Moore is 5'11" 190 with a weak arm and little mobility yet still plays in the NFL is pretty telling. Dude was a special player.
I like to say that a coach was only good because of his QB during a historic run of success that many other programs couldn't match.
I like to ignore that the coach still does a lot of other shit like: recruit the QB, Hire the coaches, Instill the culture, develop a nasty defense, recruit other players besides QB, etc.
If the QB was the only thing that mattered in football, Cal would be the favorite in the conference this year.
Petersen may suck here, but anyone can suck anywhere, it doesn't discredit what he did at Boise.
Not to mention that savior QB, wasn't highly drafted and hasn't done anything in the league, if he's still there.
But still
The fact that Moore is 5'11" 190 with a weak arm and little mobility yet still plays in the NFL is pretty telling. Dude was a special player.
Goofy bastard overachieved in more than just QBin'.
I like to say that a coach was only good because of his QB during a historic run of success that many other programs couldn't match.
I like to ignore that the coach still does a lot of other shit like: recruit the QB, Hire the coaches, Instill the culture, develop a nasty defense, recruit other players besides QB, etc.
If the QB was the only thing that mattered in football, Cal would be the favorite in the conference this year.
Petersen may suck here, but anyone can suck anywhere, it doesn't discredit what he did at Boise.
Not to mention that savior QB, wasn't highly drafted and hasn't done anything in the league, if he's still there.
But still
The fact that Moore is 5'11" 190 with a weak arm and little mobility yet still plays in the NFL is pretty telling. Dude was a special player.
Goofy bastard overachieved in more than just QBin'.
Not that I could do any better, but their gums/teeth seem very similar. Are they related?
If the only two time Bear Bryant award winning coach cant bring the huskies above what Sark made the program into, just turn the football stadium into another hospital.
You know that's what gives the hedge fund buddies a chub anyawys.
" To wit, Boise lost seven games in Petersen's final two seasons, or more than twice as many as he did in his inaugural season and all the Moore years combined. A bad run, perhaps, but Petersen also posted three losses in 2007 — as many as that entire five-year glory stretch — before Moore arrived to vault the program back up."
Where do we sign up for a bad run like that?
Remember, that's losing seven games over two seasons in the WAC.
Two losses to SDSU A loss each to Fresno State and BYU A loss to Oregon State A loss to Warshington A loss to a 7-6 Michigan State But a win over Warshington in the Lawnmower Bowl
Yes. He had a historic run THE FUCKING BEST IN NCAA FUCKING HISTORY doing it against similar teams with similar resources. Then he throws in a better team, as well, each year.
You are not good at this. In fact, you are SVEN BAD at this. HTH
" To wit, Boise lost seven games in Petersen's final two seasons, or more than twice as many as he did in his inaugural season and all the Moore years combined. A bad run, perhaps, but Petersen also posted three losses in 2007 — as many as that entire five-year glory stretch — before Moore arrived to vault the program back up."
Where do we sign up for a bad run like that?
Remember, that's losing seven games over two seasons in the WAC.
Two losses to SDSU A loss each to Fresno State and BYU A loss to Oregon State A loss to Warshington A loss to a 7-6 Michigan State But a win over Warshington in the Lawnmower Bowl
Yes. He had a historic run THE FUCKING BEST IN NCAA FUCKING HISTORY doing it against similar teams with similar resources. Then he throws in a better team, as well, each year.
You are not good at this. In fact, you are SVEN BAD at this. HTH
The 92-12 is misleading. SRS is the fairest way to evaluate these things.
During Pete's 8-year tenure, his cumulative SRS was #11. Pretty damn good. But he took over a team that was trending higher in the years before he was HC. He was OC then though so he had a hand in that. I'm waiting for my buddy to get me the cumulative ranking on Boise in the 7-years prior to Pete. I'm doing away with the 8th year as it could skew the results a bit in favor of Boise looking worse b4 Pete. I just spent an hour looking at it and I'm guessing they come in at about #37 in the years b4 Pete and that excludes that one shitty year.
Another thing to note is Utah was extremely similar pre-Wittingham to Boise pre-Pete. Like almost the same in the prior 6-7 years. I'm guessing under KW Utah has been around #30 during that period. So Pete is a much better coach than KW according to that- and people think KW is around the middle of the pac12.
Petersen will do well at UW. You are a fucktard if you think otherwise. How well? Whats your definition of well? and when?
Looking at the recruiting & building now, UW will soon look like the mid 90s teams that had strong lines, were big and tough, etc. But will it have the skill guys and stars like @Dennis_DeYoung talks about? DJ's best teams had those elite athletes. God damn I really wish Sankey, ASJ and Kasen were true freshman right now.
Pete will be here for 12-15 years and in some of those years he will get the stars and athletes that make UW a legit national title contender. It doesn't look like it in the first few years but when he reestablishes UW as a top 20 program he will be able to take recruiting from a 3.1-3.2 level up to 3.4. It happened with Harbaugh, Chip, etc. Its even happening with Dantonio and Graham now. Other thing is, Pete is a proven developer of talent and will do as well as anyone at the bottom of the class.
It's going to take some time as the conference is much tougher now as far as rebuilding (but its weaker at the very top). Again you are a fucktard if you think otherwise. I doubt Mora and Graham will be at those jobs for a while. Helfrich and Shaw will manage their schools regression, albeit slowly like UW's impending recovery. But its going to take 3-4 years, not 1-2 to get to the top of the North. That is the point when Petersen will be in position to compete nationally and bring in those top 15 classes.
Many great coaches start out slow but pick up huge momentum after the first few years. I've given examples…Briles, Snyder at KSU, Harbaugh. Even Gary fucking Pinkel has contented for a NC twice at fucking Missouri. Art Briles-15-21 his first 3 years, 40-13 since. Dantonio- 22-17 his first 3 years, 53-14 since. DJ 25-19 first 4 years then 125-40 and the 8th best record or 7th best SRS in that period. So frankly Roadie, it doesn't change the long-term outlook if he goes 6-7 this year and 8-5 next year. (That 8-5 would likely be a top 25 SRS).
Looking at Pete's track record, UW's history and advantages- @Auburndawg come back you pussy- theres no reason Pete won't be the 2nd best coach out of that group above. If not, blow up Husky Stadium and put the remnants in a fucking museum and close down the program forever.
I like to say that a coach was only good because of his QB during a historic run of success that many other programs couldn't match.
I like to ignore that the coach still does a lot of other shit like: recruit the QB, Hire the coaches, Instill the culture, develop a nasty defense, recruit other players besides QB, etc.
If the QB was the only thing that mattered in football, Cal would be the favorite in the conference this year.
Petersen may suck here, but anyone can suck anywhere, it doesn't discredit what he did at Boise.
Not to mention that savior QB, wasn't highly drafted and hasn't done anything in the league, if he's still there.
But still
The fact that Moore is 5'11" 190 with a weak arm and little mobility yet still plays in the NFL is pretty telling. Dude was a special player.
Goofy bastard overachieved in more than just QBin'.
The 92-12 is misleading. SRS is the fairest way to evaluate these things.
During Pete's 8-year tenure, his cumulative SRS was #11. Pretty damn good. But he took over a team that was trending higher in the years before he was HC. He was OC then though so he had a hand in that. I'm waiting for my buddy to get me the cumulative ranking on Boise in the 7-years prior to Pete. I'm doing away with the 8th year as it could skew the results a bit in favor of Boise looking worse b4 Pete. I just spent an hour looking at it and I'm guessing they come in at about #37 in the years b4 Pete and that excludes that one shitty year.
Another thing to note is Utah was extremely similar pre-Wittingham to Boise pre-Pete. Like almost the same in the prior 6-7 years. I'm guessing under KW Utah has been around #30 during that period. So Pete is a much better coach than KW according to that- and people think KW is around the middle of the pac12.
Petersen will do well at UW. You are a fucktard if you think otherwise. How well? Whats your definition of well? and when?
Looking at the recruiting & building now, UW will soon look like the mid 90s teams that had strong lines, were big and tough, etc. But will it have the skill guys and stars like @Dennis_DeYoung talks about? DJ's best teams had those elite athletes. God damn I really wish Sankey, ASJ and Kasen were true freshman right now.
Pete will be here for 12-15 years and in some of those years he will get the stars and athletes that make UW a legit national title contender. It doesn't look like it in the first few years but when he reestablishes UW as a top 20 program he will be able to take recruiting from a 3.1-3.2 level up to 3.4. It happened with Harbaugh, Chip, etc. Its even happening with Dantonio and Graham now. Other thing is, Pete is a proven developer of talent and will do as well as anyone at the bottom of the class.
It's going to take some time as the conference is much tougher now as far as rebuilding (but its weaker at the very top). Again you are a fucktard if you think otherwise. I doubt Mora and Graham will be at those jobs for a while. Helfrich and Shaw will manage their schools regression, albeit slowly like UW's impending recovery. But its going to take 3-4 years, not 1-2 to get to the top of the North. That is the point when Petersen will be in position to compete nationally and bring in those top 15 classes.
Many great coaches start out slow but pick up huge momentum after the first few years. I've given examples…Briles, Snyder at KSU, Harbaugh. Even Gary fucking Pinkel has contented for a NC twice at fucking Missouri. Art Briles-15-21 his first 3 years, 40-13 since. Dantonio- 22-17 his first 3 years, 53-14 since. DJ 25-19 first 4 years then 125-40 and the 8th best record or 7th best SRS in that period. So frankly Roadie, it doesn't change the long-term outlook if he goes 6-7 this year and 8-5 next year. (That 8-5 would likely be a top 25 SRS).
Looking at Pete's track record, UW's history and advantages- @Auburndawg come back you pussy- theres no reason Pete won't be the 2nd best coach out of that group above. If not, blow up Husky Stadium and put the remnants in a fucking museum and close down the program forever.
Chest, a lot of this is pure speculation. You have numbers to back up your opinion, but it's still speculation. I'm glad he's the coach here, but all his past SRS ratings don't really mean shit. If he fails he won't be the first coach to fail at his next stop and vice versa. It happens.
All it shows is that he killed it at Boise and was a great hire. Everyone agrees. Beyond that, it's unknown. His success at Boise doesn't matter anymore, at least at UW.
Talking about recruiting is one thing, and we have some good prospects, but as noted before, Petersen had a clear talent advantage at Boise that he won't have here. SRS doesn't account for possibly not having a legitimate PAC 12 starter at QB. It doesn't account for Jonathon Smith.
I hope Petersen brings UW back, but it's hope. Crunching numbers doesn't make it a foregone conclusion.
Comments
Petersen certainly achieved more than the previous Boise State coaches, but the fact is all three of the guys before him also moved on to BCS jobs and Petersen inherited a program that was already rolling. And it will roll after him as well. Boise State had the top talent in their league(s). That will never happen at UW and he inherited a middle of the pack team with the goal of taking it to the top.
His offenses have been significantly worse since Kellen Moore graduated. And the style has changed as well. On one hand, it's common sense that an offense gets worse after losing a QB that puts up Kellen Moore numbers. Otoh, it's been a steep decline and if you aren't concerned by it, you're either a huge doog or you are a genius. I'd lean more towards huge doog though. Five years ago, I would have listed Petersen in the top couple offensive coaches. Could anyone honestly say the same in 2015?
He's bringing discipline to a program that needs it. He's developed many lowly rated recruits into NFL players. If he can put together a Boise in it's prime team with a few four and five star guys we should be in business. That's why I don't freak out too much over the recruits that look shitty on paper. He still has a lot of positive attributes, including his past resume.
I'm not as excited about Petersen as I was when he was hired, but it was only one season. He was a great hire and he will get his chance to prove his worth.
You know that's what gives the hedge fund buddies a chub anyawys.
You are not good at this. In fact, you are SVEN BAD at this. HTH
He wins. You lose.
HTH
The 92-12 is misleading. SRS is the fairest way to evaluate these things.
During Pete's 8-year tenure, his cumulative SRS was #11. Pretty damn good. But he took over a team that was trending higher in the years before he was HC. He was OC then though so he had a hand in that. I'm waiting for my buddy to get me the cumulative ranking on Boise in the 7-years prior to Pete. I'm doing away with the 8th year as it could skew the results a bit in favor of Boise looking worse b4 Pete. I just spent an hour looking at it and I'm guessing they come in at about #37 in the years b4 Pete and that excludes that one shitty year.
Another thing to note is Utah was extremely similar pre-Wittingham to Boise pre-Pete. Like almost the same in the prior 6-7 years. I'm guessing under KW Utah has been around #30 during that period. So Pete is a much better coach than KW according to that- and people think KW is around the middle of the pac12.
Petersen will do well at UW. You are a fucktard if you think otherwise. How well? Whats your definition of well? and when?
Looking at the recruiting & building now, UW will soon look like the mid 90s teams that had strong lines, were big and tough, etc. But will it have the skill guys and stars like @Dennis_DeYoung talks about? DJ's best teams had those elite athletes. God damn I really wish Sankey, ASJ and Kasen were true freshman right now.
Pete will be here for 12-15 years and in some of those years he will get the stars and athletes that make UW a legit national title contender. It doesn't look like it in the first few years but when he reestablishes UW as a top 20 program he will be able to take recruiting from a 3.1-3.2 level up to 3.4. It happened with Harbaugh, Chip, etc. Its even happening with Dantonio and Graham now. Other thing is, Pete is a proven developer of talent and will do as well as anyone at the bottom of the class.
It's going to take some time as the conference is much tougher now as far as rebuilding (but its weaker at the very top). Again you are a fucktard if you think otherwise. I doubt Mora and Graham will be at those jobs for a while. Helfrich and Shaw will manage their schools regression, albeit slowly like UW's impending recovery. But its going to take 3-4 years, not 1-2 to get to the top of the North. That is the point when Petersen will be in position to compete nationally and bring in those top 15 classes.
Many great coaches start out slow but pick up huge momentum after the first few years. I've given examples…Briles, Snyder at KSU, Harbaugh. Even Gary fucking Pinkel has contented for a NC twice at fucking Missouri. Art Briles-15-21 his first 3 years, 40-13 since. Dantonio- 22-17 his first 3 years, 53-14 since. DJ 25-19 first 4 years then 125-40 and the 8th best record or 7th best SRS in that period. So frankly Roadie, it doesn't change the long-term outlook if he goes 6-7 this year and 8-5 next year. (That 8-5 would likely be a top 25 SRS).
Looking at Pete's track record, UW's history and advantages- @Auburndawg come back you pussy- theres no reason Pete won't be the 2nd best coach out of that group above. If not, blow up Husky Stadium and put the remnants in a fucking museum and close down the program forever.
Nerd stats are were true football champions are crowned.
All it shows is that he killed it at Boise and was a great hire. Everyone agrees. Beyond that, it's unknown. His success at Boise doesn't matter anymore, at least at UW.
Talking about recruiting is one thing, and we have some good prospects, but as noted before, Petersen had a clear talent advantage at Boise that he won't have here. SRS doesn't account for possibly not having a legitimate PAC 12 starter at QB. It doesn't account for Jonathon Smith.
I hope Petersen brings UW back, but it's hope. Crunching numbers doesn't make it a foregone conclusion.