Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
Shades of Sark
Comments
-
Coker was frozen in the pocket but managed to make the plays. I thought he was going to blow it. When he is on like MSU Bama rolls. When he isn't, its a nailbiter.
Dabo may be Rick - let's see how he does when Watson isn't there. The Vince Young comparisons were apt -
Shades of sark? Show this to your team... Then promptly get plungered 41-3.
-
Fire dabo!!!1!!1!!!!RoadDawg55 said:
No, shades of Sark because Dabo was the sole reason Clemson lost. The game reminded me of when Sark lost to Stanford. The sole reason Clemson lost was discipline. If Saban and him switched rosters he would have lost by 21.dnc said:Shades of Sark? Sark hardly ever lost close, when Sark lost he got destroyed. Shades of Peterman maybe.
Clemson played a damn good game. Perhaps you're just bitter because you decided Bama was shit once they lost to Ole Miss? That was nothing like a Sark game.
Never once in my life said Bama was shit. I've always said they were good. I didn't think Coker could lead them to a title, but he stepped up. Pretty big difference from saying they were shit. I've said Ole Miss is shit because they are.
Sometimes you just lose. It's the national title game. They played pretty good and lost.
Bama is good. They do shit like score touchdowns on kick offs.
Clemson was good too. They do shit like score touchdowns with white walk on wr's vs the secondary that basically everyone in the south tried to recruit out of high school. -
People remember the blowouts and forget that Sark also lost close games squarely on his blunders and lack of detail at both UW and USC.
Clemson had so many blatant assignment errors and special teams gaffes. Alabama is a great team, but Clemson beat themselves. It was a poorly coached game. Don't be confused by Watson doing his best Vince Young comparison to make it look otherwise.
It's not comparing Dabo to Sark. Obviously Dabo is way better and he has built a very good program, maybe even a great one, but it was kind of amazing to watch a team in the title game be so undisciplined when all the talent was there to win the game. -
I'm still trying to remember when Sark went 14-0 and played for a natty
-
If you're not comparing Dabo to Sark then why the thread title "Shades of Sark"?
-
Despite all this Dabo-is-Sark talk, Bellevue High School beats PLU by 2 scores on neutral field. Simple fact.
-
I like to pretend that PLU's players could tackle Myles Jack, Budda Baker, and John Nguyen.GrundleStiltzkin said:Despite all this Dabo-is-Sark talk, Bellevue High School beats PLU by 2 scores on neutral field. Simple fact.
-
Because they lost simply because they didn't play fundamental football which is something that happens to coaches that are lacking in areas.Southerndawg said:If you're not comparing Dabo to Sark then why the thread title "Shades of Sark"?
I don't think it's really that hard to get. I forget some of you are such fucking stupid doogs who take everything literal.
Btw, how did LSU end up doing? I thought they were going to buttfuck everyone and didn't need a QB? What happened? -
Did you see whatever bowl LSU played in? 56 points.RoadDawg55 said:
Because they lost simply because they didn't play fundamental football which is something that happens to coaches that are lacking in areas.Southerndawg said:If you're not comparing Dabo to Sark then why the thread title "Shades of Sark"?
I don't think it's really that hard to get. I forget some of you are such fucking stupid doogs who take everything literal.
Btw, how did LSU end up doing? I thought they were going to buttfuck everyone and didn't need a QB? What happened?
My pick for next year's champs
