We now know that the Huskies are who we thought they were.
Comments
-
They haven't played anyone worth a shit yet.HeretoBeatmyChest said:
If you can't see this team is better than the 7-6 teams, then I can't help you and your a fucking idiot. The question is how much better...some or a lot. One game it looked a lot better, one game it didnt. We'll see as the season that is already over progresses.TierbsHsotBoobs said:
Great mutually exclusive sentences as always.HeretoBeatmyChest said:LIFPO.
This team is clearly better than last year. We'll find out eventually if its better or a lot better- which it should be if it got its shit together.
This team SHOULD be 8-5 just based on the schedule difference alone. I have to LIFPO before I say they will be better than that. -
The lesson, as always, 7-6 > 7-6 > 7-6 > 7-6HeretoBeatmyChest said:
If you can't see this team is better than the 7-6 teams, then I can't help you and your a fucking idiot. The question is how much better...some or a lot. One game it looked a lot better, one game it didnt. We'll see as the season that is already over progresses.TierbsHsotBoobs said:
Great mutually exclusive sentences as always.HeretoBeatmyChest said:LIFPO.
This team is clearly better than last year. We'll find out eventually if its better or a lot better- which it should be if it got its shit together. -
The last THREE 7-6 teams were better than 7-6 teams. Don't underestimate how shitty of a coach Sark is.HeretoBeatmyChest said:
If you can't see this team is better than the 7-6 teams, then I can't help you and your a fucking idiot. The question is how much better...some or a lot. One game it looked a lot better, one game it didnt. We'll see as the season that is already over progresses.TierbsHsotBoobs said:
Great mutually exclusive sentences as always.HeretoBeatmyChest said:LIFPO.
This team is clearly better than last year. We'll find out eventually if its better or a lot better- which it should be if it got its shit together. -
Unless he gets over confident and plays with house money. Like last year.dnc said:
I have Sark winning the next three over Leach if Leach is even there that long.MikeDamone said:
Sark won't beat Leach. Ever.He_Needs_More_Time said:I think we beat the Cougs at home. Think we go 6-1 at home and 1-4 on the road then lose the crap tier bowl game.
I agree with your assessment this isn't a team ready to compete for a conference title any time soon.
Sark sucks, but he'll win most of them against mediocre coaches with poor talent like Leach. -
Actually, the House Money comment was in October 2011, but your point stands. Irregardless it's not a mute point.MikeDamone said:
Unless he gets over confident and plays with house money. Like last year.dnc said:
I have Sark winning the next three over Leach if Leach is even there that long.MikeDamone said:
Sark won't beat Leach. Ever.He_Needs_More_Time said:I think we beat the Cougs at home. Think we go 6-1 at home and 1-4 on the road then lose the crap tier bowl game.
I agree with your assessment this isn't a team ready to compete for a conference title any time soon.
Sark sucks, but he'll win most of them against mediocre coaches with poor talent like Leach. -
Home loss to WasU? Are you sure? Don't see that Damone. And don't be so certain about Oregon. A little birdy told me?MikeDamone said:A talented team with an average to below average coach. Penalties, weird play calls, turnovers, lack of focus, lack of intensity, letting a team they were on the way to crushing back into the game (FINNISH!?), Wilcox should not have had his ass crowned so soon...etc. mostly coaching issues.
Road losses to Stanford, ASU, UCLA. Home losses to Oregon and WSU. 50/50 win at OSU. AZ, Cal, Colorado,
7 wins. Same as it ever was.
-
I realize that. He has also mentioned being over confident as well on a separate occasion. It's a pattern. Sark has proven he is the kind of guy close to a goal, then seems to think all the work has been done and he can coast to the finish. The FINISH!! shit that they are preaching applies to Sark as much, if not more than the players.DerekJohnson said:
Actually, the House Money comment was in October 2011, but your point stands. Irregardless it's not a mute point.MikeDamone said:
Unless he gets over confident and plays with house money. Like last year.dnc said:
I have Sark winning the next three over Leach if Leach is even there that long.MikeDamone said:
Sark won't beat Leach. Ever.He_Needs_More_Time said:I think we beat the Cougs at home. Think we go 6-1 at home and 1-4 on the road then lose the crap tier bowl game.
I agree with your assessment this isn't a team ready to compete for a conference title any time soon.
Sark sucks, but he'll win most of them against mediocre coaches with poor talent like Leach. -
Have you been talking to Kim?puppylove_sugarsteel said:
Home loss to WasU? Are you sure? Don't see that Damone. And don't be so certain about Oregon. A little birdy told me?MikeDamone said:A talented team with an average to below average coach. Penalties, weird play calls, turnovers, lack of focus, lack of intensity, letting a team they were on the way to crushing back into the game (FINNISH!?), Wilcox should not have had his ass crowned so soon...etc. mostly coaching issues.
Road losses to Stanford, ASU, UCLA. Home losses to Oregon and WSU. 50/50 win at OSU. AZ, Cal, Colorado,
7 wins. Same as it ever was.
Last year the chnaces WSU would beat UW were close to zero. Starting the 4th quarter, the chnaces should have been zero with a moderately competent coach. This year, WSU's players are much better, leach is much better at wsu.... tick tick tick.
![[Deleted User]](https://wb.vanillicon.com/b14605887e2b6b59902271a0095c9265_100.png)
