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.
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.
Just want it on record (take all the screenshots you need) that once again I am FIRST!!1! to recognize that the loser HC needs to be door.ass.out. ASAP.
No, we don't need to LIPO. We have seen enough.
No, we don't need better talent. The talent is there.
Freeme, I'm right there with you. We all know Petersen won't get fired. He's an upper campuses wet dream off the field, so we are stuck with him unless he has multiple losing seasons. It's pretty tough to be that shitty in this day and age with the schedules. If he is eventually an 8 win coach (I think that's much more likely than a championship one) he will stay as long as he wants.
He fucking sucks though and we can talk about youth all we want, but fucktarded coaching has cost us multiple games over the past two seasons. We lost to two mediocre teams at home just this season. Unacceptable. The fact that we have the best defense in the Pac 12 and Petersen's expertise is on the offensive side of the ball makes it even worse.
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.
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.
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.
@Swaye, might be tim to add dip to the rolls of the dead.
I would accept there are a couple threads last year where I "went on record" that Peterman should be fired and there was no way he is the answer, etc. I am such a dumb fuck.
Comments
@Swaye, might be tim to add dip to the rolls of the dead.
The internet is a great thing.