Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
Danny Shelton Tweets about Sark
Comments
-
Yeah he's not the life of the party that Pete and Sark are, and I still think @GrandpaRace was right and we'd have been better off hiring Lane and Monty than Sark. But Kiffin has a lot of Sark's sloppiness in him, right down to booze in the locker room.RoadDawg55 said:
Great post, but I don't think it's entirely true about Kiffin. Kiffin isn't a good coach, but he's a serious football guy.dnc said:
They did, they just learned the wrong thing. They gravitated to the Hollywood, celebrity culture that Pete embraced, but ignored the ultra competitive nature of PC. The only reason Pete can get away with the rah rah, players coach shit is because he's the hardest working, most competitive motherfucker in the business. That and he actually has a legitimate coaching specialty (defensive backs specifically and defense in general), and a phenomenal eye for talent.2001400ex said:
What I don't get after having watching Pete Carroll in Seattle now and how he runs the team. Both Sark and Kiffen were given their jobs because Pete's recommendation to USC. How the fuck could neither of them learned anything from Carroll?bananasnblondes said:
Sark has absolutely no idea how things work in the real world. His coaching clusterfuck at SC may eclipse that of Kiffen's. Let's just hope he's not fired before it comes to fruitionHuskyJW said:Nothing brings respect to your organization when the team gets to punish the boss.
The high-energy, competitiveness and eye for talent are things you can't teach. The defensive coaching Sark and Lane didn't learn anything about because they're offensive guys. So they grabbed the one thing they could from Pete - let's have fun. It's also the one thing about Pete that won't work without all the others.
In related news, the Hooks are fucked when Pete retires and they inevitably hire one of his "proteges".
The big difference is Lane had someone to learn coaching from besides Pete. Sark barely ever worked for anyone else. Another in the litany of reasons he was a dumbfuck hire. -
-
Kiffin wasn't terrible. Alabama's offense wasn't the reason they lost the natty. He cares about football and is worth hiring for that side of the ball.
Saban didn't go full retard. -
In related news, the Hooks are fucked when Pete retires and they inevitably hire one of his "proteges".BabsGilbyTawdTy said:
Fortunately for the 12's, both Kiffin and Sark should be available.
Thank you Allah! -
One of the biggest issues of hiring Sark before you saw what he could actually do.dnc said:
Yeah he's not the life of the party that Pete and Sark are, and I still think @GrandpaRace was right and we'd have been better off hiring Lane and Monty than Sark. But Kiffin has a lot of Sark's sloppiness in him, right down to booze in the locker room.RoadDawg55 said:
Great post, but I don't think it's entirely true about Kiffin. Kiffin isn't a good coach, but he's a serious football guy.dnc said:
They did, they just learned the wrong thing. They gravitated to the Hollywood, celebrity culture that Pete embraced, but ignored the ultra competitive nature of PC. The only reason Pete can get away with the rah rah, players coach shit is because he's the hardest working, most competitive motherfucker in the business. That and he actually has a legitimate coaching specialty (defensive backs specifically and defense in general), and a phenomenal eye for talent.2001400ex said:
What I don't get after having watching Pete Carroll in Seattle now and how he runs the team. Both Sark and Kiffen were given their jobs because Pete's recommendation to USC. How the fuck could neither of them learned anything from Carroll?bananasnblondes said:
Sark has absolutely no idea how things work in the real world. His coaching clusterfuck at SC may eclipse that of Kiffen's. Let's just hope he's not fired before it comes to fruitionHuskyJW said:Nothing brings respect to your organization when the team gets to punish the boss.
The high-energy, competitiveness and eye for talent are things you can't teach. The defensive coaching Sark and Lane didn't learn anything about because they're offensive guys. So they grabbed the one thing they could from Pete - let's have fun. It's also the one thing about Pete that won't work without all the others.
In related news, the Hooks are fucked when Pete retires and they inevitably hire one of his "proteges".
The big difference is Lane had someone to learn coaching from besides Pete. Sark barely ever worked for anyone else. Another in the litany of reasons he was a dumbfuck hire. -
I saw a list of the 20 best coaches in the history of the NFL. Here are some of the "modern" names...dnc said:
I know you're being sarcasmic, but they're going to hire a defensive coach to replace him.TierbsHsotBoobs said:
The obvious advantages Bradley and Quinn have over Sark is they are defensive coaches and may have gleaned a lot from PC on that side of the ball. Also they are not career Pete assistants so they have succeeded other places with non PC talent at their disposals.
But my guess is Bevell is the replacement.
Jimmy Johnson
Tom Coughlin
Mike Shanahan
Tony Dungy
Joe Gibbs
Bill Parcells
Bill Bellichek
I don't give a shit who agrees with these names or not, it's not my list.
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/feature/index?page=greatestcoaches
What I wonder is how many of these coaches are considered offensive or defensive coaches? Anyone know off the top of their head? I am wondering if there is a noticeable difference in the number of D vs O guys who are considered top flight guys.
-
It's a pretty even split, at least of the names you listed.Swaye said:
I saw a list of the 20 best coaches in the history of the NFL. Here are some of the "modern" names...dnc said:
I know you're being sarcasmic, but they're going to hire a defensive coach to replace him.TierbsHsotBoobs said:
The obvious advantages Bradley and Quinn have over Sark is they are defensive coaches and may have gleaned a lot from PC on that side of the ball. Also they are not career Pete assistants so they have succeeded other places with non PC talent at their disposals.
But my guess is Bevell is the replacement.
Jimmy Johnson - defensive
Tom Coughlin - offensive
Mike Shanahan - offensive
Tony Dungy - defensive (interesting since he was a QB himself)
Joe Gibbs - offensive
Bill Parcells - defensive
Bill Bellichek - defensive
I don't give a shit who agrees with these names or not, it's not my list.
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/feature/index?page=greatestcoaches
What I wonder is how many of these coaches are considered offensive or defensive coaches? Anyone know off the top of their head? I am wondering if there is a noticeable difference in the number of D vs O guys who are considered top flight guys. -
I knew you would know. That is interesting. I figured there would be a much higher percentage of defensive guys...that list was made a couple years ago...you could probably throw PC on it now, but it wouldn't drastically skew the results. Interesting, or not.dnc said:
It's a pretty even split, at least of the names you listed.Swaye said:
I saw a list of the 20 best coaches in the history of the NFL. Here are some of the "modern" names...dnc said:
I know you're being sarcasmic, but they're going to hire a defensive coach to replace him.TierbsHsotBoobs said:
The obvious advantages Bradley and Quinn have over Sark is they are defensive coaches and may have gleaned a lot from PC on that side of the ball. Also they are not career Pete assistants so they have succeeded other places with non PC talent at their disposals.
But my guess is Bevell is the replacement.
Jimmy Johnson - defensive
Tom Coughlin - offensive
Mike Shanahan - offensive
Tony Dungy - defensive (interesting since he was a QB himself)
Joe Gibbs - offensive
Bill Parcells - defensive
Bill Bellichek - defensive
I don't give a shit who agrees with these names or not, it's not my list.
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/feature/index?page=greatestcoaches
What I wonder is how many of these coaches are considered offensive or defensive coaches? Anyone know off the top of their head? I am wondering if there is a noticeable difference in the number of D vs O guys who are considered top flight guys. -
lol, i remember when sark netted an extension because "the vikings wanted to talk"2001400ex said:The only argument is the protégés, as 2 of them are head coaches in the NFL and both are clearly more accomplished already than Sark.
-
The last sentence is a very important point about Sark.dnc said:
Yeah he's not the life of the party that Pete and Sark are, and I still think @GrandpaRace was right and we'd have been better off hiring Lane and Monty than Sark. But Kiffin has a lot of Sark's sloppiness in him, right down to booze in the locker room.RoadDawg55 said:
Great post, but I don't think it's entirely true about Kiffin. Kiffin isn't a good coach, but he's a serious football guy.dnc said:
They did, they just learned the wrong thing. They gravitated to the Hollywood, celebrity culture that Pete embraced, but ignored the ultra competitive nature of PC. The only reason Pete can get away with the rah rah, players coach shit is because he's the hardest working, most competitive motherfucker in the business. That and he actually has a legitimate coaching specialty (defensive backs specifically and defense in general), and a phenomenal eye for talent.2001400ex said:
What I don't get after having watching Pete Carroll in Seattle now and how he runs the team. Both Sark and Kiffen were given their jobs because Pete's recommendation to USC. How the fuck could neither of them learned anything from Carroll?bananasnblondes said:
Sark has absolutely no idea how things work in the real world. His coaching clusterfuck at SC may eclipse that of Kiffen's. Let's just hope he's not fired before it comes to fruitionHuskyJW said:Nothing brings respect to your organization when the team gets to punish the boss.
The high-energy, competitiveness and eye for talent are things you can't teach. The defensive coaching Sark and Lane didn't learn anything about because they're offensive guys. So they grabbed the one thing they could from Pete - let's have fun. It's also the one thing about Pete that won't work without all the others.
In related news, the Hooks are fucked when Pete retires and they inevitably hire one of his "proteges".
The big difference is Lane had someone to learn coaching from besides Pete. Sark barely ever worked for anyone else. Another in the litany of reasons he was a dumbfuck hire.
Most great coaches had or have to toil as assistants in less than desirable locations and move up gradually. Saban was a coach for 23 years before he got to Michigan St. That included stops at Kent St, West Virginia, Navy, Toledo, Cleveland before Michigan St, LSU and Alabama.
Urban Meyer worked for 16 years before being a HC. He had stops at Illinois St, Colorado St, Bowling Green and Utah before he hit the big time.
Pete coached for 15 years before being a HC. I would guess its 15-20 years for most.
Sark only coached 9 years! And he didn't have to toil in shit jobs and locations like these other guys. He was in LA the entire time aside from one year with the Raiders. His whole career has been at USC and UW. He never had an undesirable position or was at an undesirable school.
