Matt Calkins: Why the Huskies need Lorenzo Romar

Fire_Marshall_Bill said:

ThomasFremont said:

Fire_Marshall_Bill said:

ThomasFremont said:

FreeChavez said:

ThomasFremont said:

Tequilla said:

I don't think that the writer had a single tangible thought in the entire article ...

For those that use the whole "what was the program before Romar" argument in looking at relevance ... how many people are showing up to watch the games now? In other words, they aren't relevant now. So what Romar has really done is taken a program from irrelevant, made it somewhat relevant, pushed his chips into the middle for one and done guys, failed, and now has turned the program relatively irrelevant again.

Sounds like Petersen, minus the "somewhat relevant" moment...

And just in the event you're being half serious, CP has put more guys in the nfl than most elite programs and actually won more BCS games than 95% of elite top 5 conference programs. I'll be the first to say I have no fucing clue if he makes it at UW, but to even place romar on CP's level is an embarrassment to CP. At least he has taken a lot less talent, made it better and actually won games. Where as Romar has taken far superior talent, middled or worse, and won nothing resembling a big game in his career.

Romar has put a lot of players into the NBA relative to most power 5 programs. Now you are saying having had NFL talent makes Pete good. But that was listed earlier as a reason why Romar sucks. Can't have it both ways.

Nobody fucking cares what Pete did at Boise junior college anymore. So far he is a total failure at UW. However, Romar has had some highlights at the Pac-12 level (conference championships, tournament runs). Levels of success Pete hasn't even sniffed while coaching at the big boy table.

That is pretty fucking sad when you think about it. Romar is better than Petersen. And Romar should be coaching at some private 1A church high school at best.

But, as always, I support coach Romar.

So you're killing Petersen after 25 months and two seasons, albeit disappointing seasons, but Romar, who hasn't made a tournament in five years is better somehow?

At least give Petersen next year before you start putting him under fucking Romar. If he's 6-6 and in some crap bowl again, fine. He's definitely another Boise CC fraud. Romar has done less with more than any other Pac 12 coach I can think of....maybe Lavin is close...and I've been watching the conference since 1987 or so.

Romar's failures are numerous and well documented.

And yet Romar's accomplishments far outshine Petersen's.

If you're only counting what they've done at Washington, yes.

ThomasFremont said:

Fire_Marshall_Bill said:

ThomasFremont said:

Fire_Marshall_Bill said:

ThomasFremont said:

FreeChavez said:

ThomasFremont said:

Tequilla said:

I don't think that the writer had a single tangible thought in the entire article ...

For those that use the whole "what was the program before Romar" argument in looking at relevance ... how many people are showing up to watch the games now? In other words, they aren't relevant now. So what Romar has really done is taken a program from irrelevant, made it somewhat relevant, pushed his chips into the middle for one and done guys, failed, and now has turned the program relatively irrelevant again.

Sounds like Petersen, minus the "somewhat relevant" moment...

And just in the event you're being half serious, CP has put more guys in the nfl than most elite programs and actually won more BCS games than 95% of elite top 5 conference programs. I'll be the first to say I have no fucing clue if he makes it at UW, but to even place romar on CP's level is an embarrassment to CP. At least he has taken a lot less talent, made it better and actually won games. Where as Romar has taken far superior talent, middled or worse, and won nothing resembling a big game in his career.

Romar has put a lot of players into the NBA relative to most power 5 programs. Now you are saying having had NFL talent makes Pete good. But that was listed earlier as a reason why Romar sucks. Can't have it both ways.

Nobody fucking cares what Pete did at Boise junior college anymore. So far he is a total failure at UW. However, Romar has had some highlights at the Pac-12 level (conference championships, tournament runs). Levels of success Pete hasn't even sniffed while coaching at the big boy table.

That is pretty fucking sad when you think about it. Romar is better than Petersen. And Romar should be coaching at some private 1A church high school at best.

But, as always, I support coach Romar.

So you're killing Petersen after 25 months and two seasons, albeit disappointing seasons, but Romar, who hasn't made a tournament in five years is better somehow?

At least give Petersen next year before you start putting him under fucking Romar. If he's 6-6 and in some crap bowl again, fine. He's definitely another Boise CC fraud. Romar has done less with more than any other Pac 12 coach I can think of....maybe Lavin is close...and I've been watching the conference since 1987 or so.

Romar's failures are numerous and well documented.

And yet Romar's accomplishments far outshine Petersen's.

If you're only counting what they've done at Washington, yes.

I think I've made that pretty clear.

It is sad when the only defense for Petersen is "he was good at Boise" "he needs more time to get his guys in there" and "Sark left him nothing".

Replace Boise with USC and Sark with Ty, and these are word for word the same excuses used to prop up Sark despite his shit record.

But this time is "different"

#WhyIStayed