What I don't get is all the hate at this point ... it's just not constructive. As many have said, if Petersen isn't the guy, it's not going to result in a change after this year ... even if he loses every game from here on out.
Have there been areas of the program where there are frustrations and disappointments? Absolutely. The Smith hire was panned almost universally early on as being a head scratcher and it has been proven out on the field. Same with Pease. Not surprisingly that the two guys on the staff that had the most questionable resumes are the areas where this team is struggling the most.
That being said, there are also an abundance of positives in the program. So unlike some regimes where we could look at and say that everything is broken, that's not the case here. There are some areas where progress and changes need to be made. This is true in almost every single program at some point in time.
Now, if Petersen goes 5-4 next year in conference, then it's a good indication that he isn't the long term answer. The defense should be loaded next year. The lumps that the offense is taking now should be better for it next year. Add an uptick in coaching/scheme to the offense and that can accelerate that. Outside of Stanford, everybody else is in some phase of bad to regressing. There's plenty of reason to expect results next year and results mean being in position to win the North.
No you're being a whiny little bitch because unless you're Buddy Teevens or Willingham, coaches show what they are in year 3.
You're the kind of idiot fan that would've been calling for Saban to be fired in 1996 after he lost to Iowa to fall to 2-3. Saban only went 6-5-1 the season before.
Now I'm being "unreasonable" for expecting a successful program...how DARE I.
Right out of the doog playbook.
You must have been doing this for a long time.
Uhhh, Steve Sarkisian???
I wanted him fired the day he got hired.
I was right then, and I'm right now.
I'm pretty sure we were in the same graduating class at UW, and therefore were both on campus when Sark's fatass hit Red Square.
First initial thought, "Jesus christ. This guy was a pro-style (aka zero innovation) coordinator at a school that had superior talent and just imposed their will on teams, and HE'S going to be the savior?"
Second initial thought, "I hope all these people choke on their Sark Burgers."
Look at the product on the field. Petersen hasn't eliminated the loser mentality, only the Dude Bra mentality. Some of you fucking doogs need to learn the difference.
Petersen might even be a bigger loser. At least Sark talked shit after some liquid courage and banged sluts.
He's a molder of men. It's about more than just football.
What I don't get is all the hate at this point ... it's just not constructive. As many have said, if Petersen isn't the guy, it's not going to result in a change after this year ... even if he loses every game from here on out.
Have there been areas of the program where there are frustrations and disappointments? Absolutely. The Smith hire was panned almost universally early on as being a head scratcher and it has been proven out on the field. Same with Pease. Not surprisingly that the two guys on the staff that had the most questionable resumes are the areas where this team is struggling the most.
That being said, there are also an abundance of positives in the program. So unlike some regimes where we could look at and say that everything is broken, that's not the case here. There are some areas where progress and changes need to be made. This is true in almost every single program at some point in time.
Now, if Petersen goes 5-4 next year in conference, then it's a good indication that he isn't the long term answer. The defense should be loaded next year. The lumps that the offense is taking now should be better for it next year. Add an uptick in coaching/scheme to the offense and that can accelerate that. Outside of Stanford, everybody else is in some phase of bad to regressing. There's plenty of reason to expect results next year and results mean being in position to win the North.
Constructive? The thing is fucked, and so are we as fans. The most constructive thing to do is fire him and get the next guy in to see if he can cut it. Or we can wait and see, again, and pray he becomes something he has proven not to be on the field.
Let's fire Nick Holt J. Smith and save the program, right buddy?
What I don't get is all the hate at this point ... it's just not constructive. As many have said, if Petersen isn't the guy, it's not going to result in a change after this year ... even if he loses every game from here on out.
Have there been areas of the program where there are frustrations and disappointments? Absolutely. The Smith hire was panned almost universally early on as being a head scratcher and it has been proven out on the field. Same with Pease. Not surprisingly that the two guys on the staff that had the most questionable resumes are the areas where this team is struggling the most.
That being said, there are also an abundance of positives in the program. So unlike some regimes where we could look at and say that everything is broken, that's not the case here. There are some areas where progress and changes need to be made. This is true in almost every single program at some point in time.
Now, if Petersen goes 5-4 next year in conference, then it's a good indication that he isn't the long term answer. The defense should be loaded next year. The lumps that the offense is taking now should be better for it next year. Add an uptick in coaching/scheme to the offense and that can accelerate that. Outside of Stanford, everybody else is in some phase of bad to regressing. There's plenty of reason to expect results next year and results mean being in position to win the North.
Constructive? The thing is fucked, and so are we as fans. The most constructive thing to do is fire him and get the next guy in to see if he can cut it. Or we can wait and see, again, and pray he becomes something he has proven not to be on the field.
Let's fire Nick Holt J. Smith and save the program, right buddy?
What I don't get is all the hate at this point ... it's just not constructive. As many have said, if Petersen isn't the guy, it's not going to result in a change after this year ... even if he loses every game from here on out.
Have there been areas of the program where there are frustrations and disappointments? Absolutely. The Smith hire was panned almost universally early on as being a head scratcher and it has been proven out on the field. Same with Pease. Not surprisingly that the two guys on the staff that had the most questionable resumes are the areas where this team is struggling the most.
That being said, there are also an abundance of positives in the program. So unlike some regimes where we could look at and say that everything is broken, that's not the case here. There are some areas where progress and changes need to be made. This is true in almost every single program at some point in time.
Now, if Petersen goes 5-4 next year in conference, then it's a good indication that he isn't the long term answer. The defense should be loaded next year. The lumps that the offense is taking now should be better for it next year. Add an uptick in coaching/scheme to the offense and that can accelerate that. Outside of Stanford, everybody else is in some phase of bad to regressing. There's plenty of reason to expect results next year and results mean being in position to win the North.
Constructive? The thing is fucked, and so are we as fans. The most constructive thing to do is fire him and get the next guy in to see if he can cut it. Or we can wait and see, again, and pray he becomes something he has proven not to be on the field.
Let's fire Nick Holt J. Smith and save the program, right buddy?
Deja vu all over again.
You're right, Woodward has done so well by us with Ty, Sark and Pete.
If I was the AD, you'd be sucking my dick right now, boy.
Are we done here, or do you want me to keep embarrassing you in front of the entire bored?
What I don't get is all the hate at this point ... it's just not constructive. As many have said, if Petersen isn't the guy, it's not going to result in a change after this year ... even if he loses every game from here on out.
Have there been areas of the program where there are frustrations and disappointments? Absolutely. The Smith hire was panned almost universally early on as being a head scratcher and it has been proven out on the field. Same with Pease. Not surprisingly that the two guys on the staff that had the most questionable resumes are the areas where this team is struggling the most.
That being said, there are also an abundance of positives in the program. So unlike some regimes where we could look at and say that everything is broken, that's not the case here. There are some areas where progress and changes need to be made. This is true in almost every single program at some point in time.
Now, if Petersen goes 5-4 next year in conference, then it's a good indication that he isn't the long term answer. The defense should be loaded next year. The lumps that the offense is taking now should be better for it next year. Add an uptick in coaching/scheme to the offense and that can accelerate that. Outside of Stanford, everybody else is in some phase of bad to regressing. There's plenty of reason to expect results next year and results mean being in position to win the North.
Constructive? The thing is fucked, and so are we as fans. The most constructive thing to do is fire him and get the next guy in to see if he can cut it. Or we can wait and see, again, and pray he becomes something he has proven not to be on the field.
Let's fire Nick Holt J. Smith and save the program, right buddy?
Deja vu all over again.
If the issue with Sarkisian was simply that it was a problem with his defense then that makes a lot of sense. But the issues with Sarkisian were far more systematic. Significant problems under Sarkisian (just to name a few):
Depth of recruiting Deteriorating in-state recruiting and relationships with local area coaches Recruiting turnover (verbals going elsewhere) Player development Consistent long-term losing streaks each season with plungerings Sloppy play/execution "Penalties don't matter" Mentally soft program (big time front runners)
The above are all things that you almost never see out of a good program. Not only was this a Sarkisian staple at UW, but also indicative of his USC tenure as well.
Petersen's issues at this point can generally be summed up as follows:
Poor offensive hires (Smith/Pease) and systems (dating back to Boise --> signals need for fresh ideas) Game/Clock management, particularly in two minute drills Poor home record in conference
I said absolutely nothing about Woodward. It honestly feels like I'm debating with an idiot who makes non-sequiturs and constructs straw men. Impossible to stay on point.
What I don't get is all the hate at this point ... it's just not constructive. As many have said, if Petersen isn't the guy, it's not going to result in a change after this year ... even if he loses every game from here on out.
Have there been areas of the program where there are frustrations and disappointments? Absolutely. The Smith hire was panned almost universally early on as being a head scratcher and it has been proven out on the field. Same with Pease. Not surprisingly that the two guys on the staff that had the most questionable resumes are the areas where this team is struggling the most.
That being said, there are also an abundance of positives in the program. So unlike some regimes where we could look at and say that everything is broken, that's not the case here. There are some areas where progress and changes need to be made. This is true in almost every single program at some point in time.
Now, if Petersen goes 5-4 next year in conference, then it's a good indication that he isn't the long term answer. The defense should be loaded next year. The lumps that the offense is taking now should be better for it next year. Add an uptick in coaching/scheme to the offense and that can accelerate that. Outside of Stanford, everybody else is in some phase of bad to regressing. There's plenty of reason to expect results next year and results mean being in position to win the North.
Constructive? The thing is fucked, and so are we as fans. The most constructive thing to do is fire him and get the next guy in to see if he can cut it. Or we can wait and see, again, and pray he becomes something he has proven not to be on the field.
Let's fire Nick Holt J. Smith and save the program, right buddy?
Deja vu all over again.
You're right, Woodward has done so well by us with Ty, Sark and Pete.
If I was the AD, you'd be sucking my dick right now, boy.
Are we done here, or do you want me to keep embarrassing you in front of the entire bored?
What I don't get is all the hate at this point ... it's just not constructive. As many have said, if Petersen isn't the guy, it's not going to result in a change after this year ... even if he loses every game from here on out.
Have there been areas of the program where there are frustrations and disappointments? Absolutely. The Smith hire was panned almost universally early on as being a head scratcher and it has been proven out on the field. Same with Pease. Not surprisingly that the two guys on the staff that had the most questionable resumes are the areas where this team is struggling the most.
That being said, there are also an abundance of positives in the program. So unlike some regimes where we could look at and say that everything is broken, that's not the case here. There are some areas where progress and changes need to be made. This is true in almost every single program at some point in time.
Now, if Petersen goes 5-4 next year in conference, then it's a good indication that he isn't the long term answer. The defense should be loaded next year. The lumps that the offense is taking now should be better for it next year. Add an uptick in coaching/scheme to the offense and that can accelerate that. Outside of Stanford, everybody else is in some phase of bad to regressing. There's plenty of reason to expect results next year and results mean being in position to win the North.
Constructive? The thing is fucked, and so are we as fans. The most constructive thing to do is fire him and get the next guy in to see if he can cut it. Or we can wait and see, again, and pray he becomes something he has proven not to be on the field.
Let's fire Nick Holt J. Smith and save the program, right buddy?
Deja vu all over again.
Depth of recruiting Deteriorating in-state recruiting and relationships with local area coaches Recruiting turnover (verbals going elsewhere) Player development Consistent long-term losing streaks each season with plungerings Sloppy play/execution "Penalties don't matter" Mentally soft program(big time front runners)
Even depth of recruiting hasn't been proven at this point with Petersen. In-state recruiting WILL deteriorate after more mediocre seasons. Player development has been unproven, you have shit to show otherwise. We've been plungered in Peteresen's tenure. Play has been extremely sloppy at times, even on the defense the tackling has been shitty when it's mattered. Penalties do matter to the staff but they've taken stupid ones at times, especially in the Oregon game.
What I don't get is all the hate at this point ... it's just not constructive. As many have said, if Petersen isn't the guy, it's not going to result in a change after this year ... even if he loses every game from here on out.
Have there been areas of the program where there are frustrations and disappointments? Absolutely. The Smith hire was panned almost universally early on as being a head scratcher and it has been proven out on the field. Same with Pease. Not surprisingly that the two guys on the staff that had the most questionable resumes are the areas where this team is struggling the most.
That being said, there are also an abundance of positives in the program. So unlike some regimes where we could look at and say that everything is broken, that's not the case here. There are some areas where progress and changes need to be made. This is true in almost every single program at some point in time.
Now, if Petersen goes 5-4 next year in conference, then it's a good indication that he isn't the long term answer. The defense should be loaded next year. The lumps that the offense is taking now should be better for it next year. Add an uptick in coaching/scheme to the offense and that can accelerate that. Outside of Stanford, everybody else is in some phase of bad to regressing. There's plenty of reason to expect results next year and results mean being in position to win the North.
We expected a coaching upgrade. That's where the anger is from. Offensive coach that has no clue. Numerous coaching blunders. How patient can one be? We know how to spot shitty coaching. It's a shame you still can't.
What I don't get is all the hate at this point ... it's just not constructive. As many have said, if Petersen isn't the guy, it's not going to result in a change after this year ... even if he loses every game from here on out.
Have there been areas of the program where there are frustrations and disappointments? Absolutely. The Smith hire was panned almost universally early on as being a head scratcher and it has been proven out on the field. Same with Pease. Not surprisingly that the two guys on the staff that had the most questionable resumes are the areas where this team is struggling the most.
That being said, there are also an abundance of positives in the program. So unlike some regimes where we could look at and say that everything is broken, that's not the case here. There are some areas where progress and changes need to be made. This is true in almost every single program at some point in time.
Now, if Petersen goes 5-4 next year in conference, then it's a good indication that he isn't the long term answer. The defense should be loaded next year. The lumps that the offense is taking now should be better for it next year. Add an uptick in coaching/scheme to the offense and that can accelerate that. Outside of Stanford, everybody else is in some phase of bad to regressing. There's plenty of reason to expect results next year and results mean being in position to win the North.
Constructive? The thing is fucked, and so are we as fans. The most constructive thing to do is fire him and get the next guy in to see if he can cut it. Or we can wait and see, again, and pray he becomes something he has proven not to be on the field.
Let's fire Nick Holt J. Smith and save the program, right buddy?
Deja vu all over again.
Depth of recruiting Deteriorating in-state recruiting and relationships with local area coaches Recruiting turnover (verbals going elsewhere) Player development Consistent long-term losing streaks each season with plungerings Sloppy play/execution "Penalties don't matter" Mentally soft program(big time front runners)
Even depth of recruiting hasn't been proven at this point with Petersen. In-state recruiting WILL deteriorate after more mediocre seasons. Player development has been unproven, you have shit to show otherwise. We've been plungered in Peteresen's tenure. Play has been extremely sloppy at times, even on the defense the tackling has been shitty when it's mattered. Penalties do matter to the staff but they've taken stupid ones at times, especially in the Oregon game.
Mentally soft program. See Oregon game last week.
Player Development: Status of DBs from start of last season through last season and into this season. Replacing DL and not seeing drop off. You're blind IMO if you can't see the player development by and large in this program.
Generally I am associating sloppy play with being young.
I don't see a mentally soft program at all. Generally speaking, with the exception of Oregon last year and a bad matchup with UCLA with Kikaha getting injured early, this program has not only consistently been in games, but has been resilient in generally winning the 2nd halves. You would be better served pointing towards slow starts than mentally soft.
For those wanting to fire Pete, I'd recommend directing your ire to firing Pool Boy as not only do you have more ammo, but you wouldn't want Pool Boy making the next hire anyway.
Of course, for as bad as Pool Boy is, also important to at least consider that the next hire could be worse than Pool Boy (not trying to prop him up here ... just stating that that's a possible) ... and given new President ... not convinced that you wouldn't end up with the next generation version of Turner.
What I don't get is all the hate at this point ... it's just not constructive. As many have said, if Petersen isn't the guy, it's not going to result in a change after this year ... even if he loses every game from here on out.
Have there been areas of the program where there are frustrations and disappointments? Absolutely. The Smith hire was panned almost universally early on as being a head scratcher and it has been proven out on the field. Same with Pease. Not surprisingly that the two guys on the staff that had the most questionable resumes are the areas where this team is struggling the most.
That being said, there are also an abundance of positives in the program. So unlike some regimes where we could look at and say that everything is broken, that's not the case here. There are some areas where progress and changes need to be made. This is true in almost every single program at some point in time.
Now, if Petersen goes 5-4 next year in conference, then it's a good indication that he isn't the long term answer. The defense should be loaded next year. The lumps that the offense is taking now should be better for it next year. Add an uptick in coaching/scheme to the offense and that can accelerate that. Outside of Stanford, everybody else is in some phase of bad to regressing. There's plenty of reason to expect results next year and results mean being in position to win the North.
Constructive? The thing is fucked, and so are we as fans. The most constructive thing to do is fire him and get the next guy in to see if he can cut it. Or we can wait and see, again, and pray he becomes something he has proven not to be on the field.
Let's fire Nick Holt J. Smith and save the program, right buddy?
Deja vu all over again.
Depth of recruiting Deteriorating in-state recruiting and relationships with local area coaches Recruiting turnover (verbals going elsewhere) Player development Consistent long-term losing streaks each season with plungerings Sloppy play/execution "Penalties don't matter" Mentally soft program(big time front runners)
Even depth of recruiting hasn't been proven at this point with Petersen. In-state recruiting WILL deteriorate after more mediocre seasons. Player development has been unproven, you have shit to show otherwise. We've been plungered in Peteresen's tenure. Play has been extremely sloppy at times, even on the defense the tackling has been shitty when it's mattered. Penalties do matter to the staff but they've taken stupid ones at times, especially in the Oregon game.
Mentally soft program. See Oregon game last week.
Player Development: Status of DBs from start of last season through last season and into this season. Replacing DL and not seeing drop off. You're blind IMO if you can't see the player development by and large in this program.
Generally I am associating sloppy play with being young.
I don't see a mentally soft program at all. Generally speaking, with the exception of Oregon last year and a bad matchup with UCLA with Kikaha getting injured early, this program has not only consistently been in games, but has been resilient in generally winning the 2nd halves. You would be better served pointing towards slow starts than mentally soft.
Mentally soft is having an 11 game losing streak to a team that owns you (they've surpassed rival status) and walking off that fucking field with their quarterback still able to walk. Or playing your coach's former hick team and not shoving 50 pound bags of taters up their collective cunts for 4 quarters. What about Cal? Man, they sure look godly in this game I'm watching against a mediocre UCLA team.
The DB's got fucking outclassed last game too. Yeah, we lost to UCLA last year because we didn't have Kikaha. Fuck off.
The two starting receivers haven't appeared to have developed at all. Jesus, there's no point in even debating this anymore.
What I don't get is all the hate at this point ... it's just not constructive. As many have said, if Petersen isn't the guy, it's not going to result in a change after this year ... even if he loses every game from here on out.
Have there been areas of the program where there are frustrations and disappointments? Absolutely. The Smith hire was panned almost universally early on as being a head scratcher and it has been proven out on the field. Same with Pease. Not surprisingly that the two guys on the staff that had the most questionable resumes are the areas where this team is struggling the most.
That being said, there are also an abundance of positives in the program. So unlike some regimes where we could look at and say that everything is broken, that's not the case here. There are some areas where progress and changes need to be made. This is true in almost every single program at some point in time.
Now, if Petersen goes 5-4 next year in conference, then it's a good indication that he isn't the long term answer. The defense should be loaded next year. The lumps that the offense is taking now should be better for it next year. Add an uptick in coaching/scheme to the offense and that can accelerate that. Outside of Stanford, everybody else is in some phase of bad to regressing. There's plenty of reason to expect results next year and results mean being in position to win the North.
Constructive? The thing is fucked, and so are we as fans. The most constructive thing to do is fire him and get the next guy in to see if he can cut it. Or we can wait and see, again, and pray he becomes something he has proven not to be on the field.
Let's fire Nick Holt J. Smith and save the program, right buddy?
Deja vu all over again.
Depth of recruiting Deteriorating in-state recruiting and relationships with local area coaches Recruiting turnover (verbals going elsewhere) Player development Consistent long-term losing streaks each season with plungerings Sloppy play/execution "Penalties don't matter" Mentally soft program(big time front runners)
Even depth of recruiting hasn't been proven at this point with Petersen. In-state recruiting WILL deteriorate after more mediocre seasons. Player development has been unproven, you have shit to show otherwise. We've been plungered in Peteresen's tenure. Play has been extremely sloppy at times, even on the defense the tackling has been shitty when it's mattered. Penalties do matter to the staff but they've taken stupid ones at times, especially in the Oregon game.
Mentally soft program. See Oregon game last week.
Player Development: Status of DBs from start of last season through last season and into this season. Replacing DL and not seeing drop off. You're blind IMO if you can't see the player development by and large in this program.
Generally I am associating sloppy play with being young.
I don't see a mentally soft program at all. Generally speaking, with the exception of Oregon last year and a bad matchup with UCLA with Kikaha getting injured early, this program has not only consistently been in games, but has been resilient in generally winning the 2nd halves. You would be better served pointing towards slow starts than mentally soft.
The two starting receivers haven't appeared to have developed at all. Jesus, there's no point in even debating this anymore.
And where have I suggested that changes need to be made? OC and WR Coach
I said absolutely nothing about Woodward. It honestly feels like I'm debating with an idiot who makes non-sequiturs and constructs straw men. Impossible to stay on point.
What I don't get is all the hate at this point ... it's just not constructive. As many have said, if Petersen isn't the guy, it's not going to result in a change after this year ... even if he loses every game from here on out.
Have there been areas of the program where there are frustrations and disappointments? Absolutely. The Smith hire was panned almost universally early on as being a head scratcher and it has been proven out on the field. Same with Pease. Not surprisingly that the two guys on the staff that had the most questionable resumes are the areas where this team is struggling the most.
That being said, there are also an abundance of positives in the program. So unlike some regimes where we could look at and say that everything is broken, that's not the case here. There are some areas where progress and changes need to be made. This is true in almost every single program at some point in time.
Now, if Petersen goes 5-4 next year in conference, then it's a good indication that he isn't the long term answer. The defense should be loaded next year. The lumps that the offense is taking now should be better for it next year. Add an uptick in coaching/scheme to the offense and that can accelerate that. Outside of Stanford, everybody else is in some phase of bad to regressing. There's plenty of reason to expect results next year and results mean being in position to win the North.
Constructive? The thing is fucked, and so are we as fans. The most constructive thing to do is fire him and get the next guy in to see if he can cut it. Or we can wait and see, again, and pray he becomes something he has proven not to be on the field.
Let's fire Nick Holt J. Smith and save the program, right buddy?
Deja vu all over again.
You're right, Woodward has done so well by us with Ty, Sark and Pete.
If I was the AD, you'd be sucking my dick right now, boy.
Are we done here, or do you want me to keep embarrassing you in front of the entire bored?
Just because you can't keep up, doesn't mean you need to go and start name-calling.
Signaling out the DB's is cherry picking. If we can do that there, then where the fuck is the development on offense? QB development? OL? WR? And like I said before, this is all Pete's shit where he grew as an assistant before becoming the big boss.
We are young at DB, but they rose up. It didn't take years like on offense. And if we go further back with Pete, his offenses have been bad for awhile. It didn't start at UW. Stop ignoring this bullshit and providing excuses. There are none for what we are watching.
What I don't get is all the hate at this point ... it's just not constructive. As many have said, if Petersen isn't the guy, it's not going to result in a change after this year ... even if he loses every game from here on out.
Have there been areas of the program where there are frustrations and disappointments? Absolutely. The Smith hire was panned almost universally early on as being a head scratcher and it has been proven out on the field. Same with Pease. Not surprisingly that the two guys on the staff that had the most questionable resumes are the areas where this team is struggling the most.
That being said, there are also an abundance of positives in the program. So unlike some regimes where we could look at and say that everything is broken, that's not the case here. There are some areas where progress and changes need to be made. This is true in almost every single program at some point in time.
Now, if Petersen goes 5-4 next year in conference, then it's a good indication that he isn't the long term answer. The defense should be loaded next year. The lumps that the offense is taking now should be better for it next year. Add an uptick in coaching/scheme to the offense and that can accelerate that. Outside of Stanford, everybody else is in some phase of bad to regressing. There's plenty of reason to expect results next year and results mean being in position to win the North.
We expected a coaching upgrade. That's where the anger is from. Offensive coach that has no clue. Numerous coaching blunders. How patient can one be? We know how to spot shitty coaching. It's a shame you still can't.
You act like I'm not frustrated as well ... I am.
But at this point, we're a little over half way through the initial evaluation period. Until we get through the third year, it's an incomplete picture.
I see all the concerns that you have ... I share many of them.
The results will dictate the actions ... you can't go around replacing people at the first sign of concern ...
I can only imagine how this board would have reacted if we lost a game the way Michigan did this past week.
What I don't get is all the hate at this point ... it's just not constructive. As many have said, if Petersen isn't the guy, it's not going to result in a change after this year ... even if he loses every game from here on out.
Have there been areas of the program where there are frustrations and disappointments? Absolutely. The Smith hire was panned almost universally early on as being a head scratcher and it has been proven out on the field. Same with Pease. Not surprisingly that the two guys on the staff that had the most questionable resumes are the areas where this team is struggling the most.
That being said, there are also an abundance of positives in the program. So unlike some regimes where we could look at and say that everything is broken, that's not the case here. There are some areas where progress and changes need to be made. This is true in almost every single program at some point in time.
Now, if Petersen goes 5-4 next year in conference, then it's a good indication that he isn't the long term answer. The defense should be loaded next year. The lumps that the offense is taking now should be better for it next year. Add an uptick in coaching/scheme to the offense and that can accelerate that. Outside of Stanford, everybody else is in some phase of bad to regressing. There's plenty of reason to expect results next year and results mean being in position to win the North.
We expected a coaching upgrade. That's where the anger is from. Offensive coach that has no clue. Numerous coaching blunders. How patient can one be? We know how to spot shitty coaching. It's a shame you still can't.
You act like I'm not frustrated as well ... I am.
But at this point, we're a little over half way through the initial evaluation period. Until we get through the third year, it's an incomplete picture.
I see all the concerns that you have ... I share many of them.
The results will dictate the actions ... you can't go around replacing people at the first sign of concern ...
I can only imagine how this board would have reacted if we lost a game the way Michigan did this past week.
The Michigan example is totally different. You are showing your stripes by going there.
Signaling out the DB's is cherry picking. If we can do that there, then where the fuck is the development on offense? QB development? OL? WR?
And how many fucking times have I said that changes need to be made there not only in staff but also in scheme/methodology? I don't mind if you're going to disagree with me, but at least get it fucking right what you're disagreeing with and stop being a miserable fucktard about it.
As for the OL, that's one of the few positions where youth is really a valid excuse in my mind ... freshman OL (whether true or RS) in an ideally ran program aren't seeing the field. It's apples and oranges compared to DBs who rely much more on their athletic ability for success.
Trying to compare development in the OL to DBs for freshman is right up there for fucktarded arguments of the week.
Comments
Have there been areas of the program where there are frustrations and disappointments? Absolutely. The Smith hire was panned almost universally early on as being a head scratcher and it has been proven out on the field. Same with Pease. Not surprisingly that the two guys on the staff that had the most questionable resumes are the areas where this team is struggling the most.
That being said, there are also an abundance of positives in the program. So unlike some regimes where we could look at and say that everything is broken, that's not the case here. There are some areas where progress and changes need to be made. This is true in almost every single program at some point in time.
Now, if Petersen goes 5-4 next year in conference, then it's a good indication that he isn't the long term answer. The defense should be loaded next year. The lumps that the offense is taking now should be better for it next year. Add an uptick in coaching/scheme to the offense and that can accelerate that. Outside of Stanford, everybody else is in some phase of bad to regressing. There's plenty of reason to expect results next year and results mean being in position to win the North.
Team GPA is as high as it's ever been!
Jeepers, get some perspective.
Let's fire
Nick HoltJ. Smith and save the program, right buddy?Deja vu all over again.
If I was the AD, you'd be sucking my dick right now, boy.
Are we done here, or do you want me to keep embarrassing you in front of the entire bored?
Depth of recruiting
Deteriorating in-state recruiting and relationships with local area coaches
Recruiting turnover (verbals going elsewhere)
Player development
Consistent long-term losing streaks each season with plungerings
Sloppy play/execution
"Penalties don't matter"
Mentally soft program (big time front runners)
The above are all things that you almost never see out of a good program. Not only was this a Sarkisian staple at UW, but also indicative of his USC tenure as well.
Petersen's issues at this point can generally be summed up as follows:
Poor offensive hires (Smith/Pease) and systems (dating back to Boise --> signals need for fresh ideas)
Game/Clock management, particularly in two minute drills
Poor home record in conference
Mentally soft program. See Oregon game last week.
Generally I am associating sloppy play with being young.
I don't see a mentally soft program at all. Generally speaking, with the exception of Oregon last year and a bad matchup with UCLA with Kikaha getting injured early, this program has not only consistently been in games, but has been resilient in generally winning the 2nd halves. You would be better served pointing towards slow starts than mentally soft.
Of course, for as bad as Pool Boy is, also important to at least consider that the next hire could be worse than Pool Boy (not trying to prop him up here ... just stating that that's a possible) ... and given new President ... not convinced that you wouldn't end up with the next generation version of Turner.
The DB's got fucking outclassed last game too. Yeah, we lost to UCLA last year because we didn't have Kikaha. Fuck off.
The two starting receivers haven't appeared to have developed at all. Jesus, there's no point in even debating this anymore.
We are young at DB, but they rose up. It didn't take years like on offense. And if we go further back with Pete, his offenses have been bad for awhile. It didn't start at UW. Stop ignoring this bullshit and providing excuses. There are none for what we are watching.
But at this point, we're a little over half way through the initial evaluation period. Until we get through the third year, it's an incomplete picture.
I see all the concerns that you have ... I share many of them.
The results will dictate the actions ... you can't go around replacing people at the first sign of concern ...
I can only imagine how this board would have reacted if we lost a game the way Michigan did this past week.
Fuck
As for the OL, that's one of the few positions where youth is really a valid excuse in my mind ... freshman OL (whether true or RS) in an ideally ran program aren't seeing the field. It's apples and oranges compared to DBs who rely much more on their athletic ability for success.
Trying to compare development in the OL to DBs for freshman is right up there for fucktarded arguments of the week.