Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.

#FirePetersen

1235715

Comments

  • ThomasFremont
    ThomasFremont Member Posts: 13,325

    haie said:

    HFNY said:

    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.



    HFNY said:

    image

    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.

    Team GPA is as high as it's ever been!

    Jeepers, get some perspective.
  • ThomasFremont
    ThomasFremont Member Posts: 13,325
    Tequilla said:

    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.
  • HFNY
    HFNY Member Posts: 5,505
    Fortunately you aren't an AD or else you'd fire the coach every time you have a heavy flow day.

    Tequilla said:

    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.
  • ThomasFremont
    ThomasFremont Member Posts: 13,325
    HFNY said:

    Fortunately you aren't an AD or else you'd fire the coach every time you have a heavy flow day.

    Tequilla said:

    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?
  • Tequilla
    Tequilla Member Posts: 20,223

    Tequilla said:

    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



  • HFNY
    HFNY Member Posts: 5,505
    edited October 2015
    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.

    HFNY said:

    Fortunately you aren't an AD or else you'd fire the coach every time you have a heavy flow day.

    Tequilla said:

    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?
  • haie
    haie Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 24,424 Founders Club
    Tequilla said:

    Tequilla said:

    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.
  • Tequilla
    Tequilla Member Posts: 20,223
    haie said:

    Tequilla said:

    Tequilla said:

    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.