Gaskin averaged 100 yards rushing per game as a true frosh?

Fire_Marshall_Bill said:

show previous quotes

TierbsHsotBoobs said:

puppylove_sugarsteel said:

TurdBuffer said:

EwaDawg said:

dnc said:

PurpleJ said:

Yeah and we had a GREAT defense and only went 7-6 (4-5). The metrics are pointing up. Pete sure did a hell of a job last year.

I know you're being sarcasmic but everything you said before the final sentence is true.

Pete is good at developing talent. In game coaching? He can get better.

True and accurate. Pac12 is way tougher, top to bottom, than the MW, where many of Pete's wins were in his pocket before the game started. Context matters for expectations.

Pete's #1 quality is as a sideline coach Turd. WTF, do you even watch college football? . 92-12 before he got to UW pretty much backs it up. I watched every notable game Pete coached at bsu. Simply a master in big games. Sometimes puppy just shakes his head at some of the shit that dribbles out your cunts out here (hi kim)

92-12 proved that he could inherit the dominant program in the WAC and beat retards.

Oklahomo, Oregon two years in a row, virgin tech, tcu twice, georgia Oregon st

Bill: You did not write Oregon State. No, you didn't. My eyes deceive me, right?

I don't understand all the hurt butts about CP. I'm a fan, and I believe we're watching him grow into a top-tier Pac12 coach. But he's not there yet so stop dumping 100% of the fault on "Sark's players" or "youth." Who brought us Smiff, huh? Maybe this is the year CP breaks through to the top of the league. Great. But he got caught with his pants down around his ankles several times in '14 and '15, because the Pac12 is way tougher to navigate week in and week out than the MW. Very seldom will there be cupcakes in Pac12 league like in the MW. And that's why CP was 92-12 and not 72-30, which is still fucking great and justifies hiring him.

Jesus Christ, are we really arguing the MW is equal in strength to the Pac12?

Fire_Marshall_Bill said:

show previous quotes

TurdBuffer said:

Fire_Marshall_Bill said:

TierbsHsotBoobs said:

puppylove_sugarsteel said:

TurdBuffer said:

EwaDawg said:

dnc said:

PurpleJ said:

Yeah and we had a GREAT defense and only went 7-6 (4-5). The metrics are pointing up. Pete sure did a hell of a job last year.

I know you're being sarcasmic but everything you said before the final sentence is true.

Pete is good at developing talent. In game coaching? He can get better.

True and accurate. Pac12 is way tougher, top to bottom, than the MW, where many of Pete's wins were in his pocket before the game started. Context matters for expectations.

Pete's #1 quality is as a sideline coach Turd. WTF, do you even watch college football? . 92-12 before he got to UW pretty much backs it up. I watched every notable game Pete coached at bsu. Simply a master in big games. Sometimes puppy just shakes his head at some of the shit that dribbles out your cunts out here (hi kim)

92-12 proved that he could inherit the dominant program in the WAC and beat retards.

Oklahomo, Oregon two years in a row, virgin tech, tcu twice, georgia Oregon st

Bill: You did not write Oregon State. No, you didn't. My eyes deceive me, right?

I don't understand all the hurt butts about CP. I'm a fan, and I believe we're watching him grow into a top-tier Pac12 coach. But he's not there yet so stop dumping 100% of the fault on "Sark's players" or "youth." Who brought us Smiff, huh? Maybe this is the year CP breaks through to the top of the league. Great. But he got caught with his pants down around his ankles several times in '14 and '15, because the Pac12 is way tougher to navigate week in and week out than the MW. Very seldom will there be cupcakes in Pac12 league like in the MW. And that's why CP was 92-12 and not 72-30, which is still fucking great and justifies hiring him.

Jesus Christ, are we really arguing the MW is equal in strength to the Pac12?

I'm not butt hurt.m I'm Puppy's brother, remember? Some criticism is warranted and Smith probably should have been fired, and the Sark excuse (used by tons on here, but not me) is flimsy. Youth was more legitimate. I agree, he's probably 72-30 in the Pac 12.

There are people here who are just entrenched in their own narratives and thinking from 2008 or they're just trying hard to fit and be funny (usually failing) in or not rock the boat. I'm done with that shit. Tell me I'm wrong.

You are not wrong.

@Ice_Holmvik: I get it's a process. But we're still not seeing the big, important wins. UW's been "on the upswing" or "building" or "doing it the right way" ever since 2008. It's now 2016. Sark had his best, 9 win season before he left, but everyone knows that season's schedule had more to do with win #9 than team improvement. Truth is, UW plateaued under Sark, still losing the big games and going to shit-tier bowls.

CP is different, and recruiting is a great indicator of internal program strength. But the red flag-wearing elephant in the room is Smiff. That's the one, big decision that I question CP's reasoning on. The Tedford hire may yield positive results, but it also shines a spotlight on the truck full of "special needs" equipment and support Smiff requires, which is like dumping thousands into a jalopy car worth $500.

Point that I agree with Race and iDawg about, is that nobody should be sporting a sweat pants boner anymore, until we see UW beating at least 3 of 4 Cali teams, both AZ's and of course, Oregon. And we can't get there with the best D in the conference. We need a potent offense, not a weak, troubled, dysfunctional passing game that makes UW one dimensional like last year.

This could be "the year," but fans have been saying that since 2008. CP's a big boy, paid a lot of money, in his third year of doing a job he says he always wanted. It's show me time. No more boner teases.

Ice_Holmvik said:

Turn Around?

Before Pete: 7,7,7,9
Pete: 8,7
Recap: Old coach: 7 to 9. New coach: 8 to 7. New coach wins 8 using same players from old coach's 9 win team.

Regress: to move backward, go back. Revert to an earlier or less advanced state.



Petersen couold have easily came in and kept the Huskies at a 8-9 win team the first 4-5 years and by year 6-7 he would have had his guys and system in place. To do that he would have used Sark's team and philosophies and slowly phased the team over to his own. But mediocrity isnt in Pete's genes. He is here to build a perennial 10+ win team every year. He blew Sark's house of cards apart and started building his brick mansion one piece at a time. For Christ's sake Pete has been telling people to be patient because he knew what a giant overhaul he was undertaking. It wasnt just the players but the whole giant stink around the program that he had to change. Like Puppy has stated this is a 4-5 year deal with this season being a bonus if they overachieve.

Why is it so FUCKING hard for people to understand why this is a process? Your eyes are as good as mine. Wait cancel that. You all have Grandpa Sankey football vision.

FO.

Baseman said:

show previous quotes

puppylove_sugarsteel said:

J, it takes a qb with a little practice to go with a "stud rb" to win at this level. Notice this team was deficient in that category? Are you really this dumb? Rhetorical question. You really are this dumb. Need a fix we can prolly all put our heads together and find you one. You have these periods of retardedness that can only be explained by a pipe, bottle or needle. I can get you a bottle only. Remember though, no HH member gets left behind. Smack is available around every corner in hilltop. Goid lord J get your sketchers on and beat feet. Check back when you got your wit back.

See Keith Price and Bishop Sankey; Jack Lockner and Chris Polk

WTF are you talking about? Jesus Tommy has more football smarts than u base. Stick to the softball double play analysis. More in your lane.

TurdBuffer said:

show previous quotes

Fire_Marshall_Bill said:

TierbsHsotBoobs said:

puppylove_sugarsteel said:

TurdBuffer said:

EwaDawg said:

dnc said:

PurpleJ said:

Yeah and we had a GREAT defense and only went 7-6 (4-5). The metrics are pointing up. Pete sure did a hell of a job last year.

I know you're being sarcasmic but everything you said before the final sentence is true.

Pete is good at developing talent. In game coaching? He can get better.

True and accurate. Pac12 is way tougher, top to bottom, than the MW, where many of Pete's wins were in his pocket before the game started. Context matters for expectations.

Pete's #1 quality is as a sideline coach Turd. WTF, do you even watch college football? . 92-12 before he got to UW pretty much backs it up. I watched every notable game Pete coached at bsu. Simply a master in big games. Sometimes puppy just shakes his head at some of the shit that dribbles out your cunts out here (hi kim)

92-12 proved that he could inherit the dominant program in the WAC and beat retards.

Oklahomo, Oregon two years in a row, virgin tech, tcu twice, georgia Oregon st

Bill: You did not write Oregon State. No, you didn't. My eyes deceive me, right?

I don't understand all the hurt butts about CP. I'm a fan, and I believe we're watching him grow into a top-tier Pac12 coach. But he's not there yet so stop dumping 100% of the fault on "Sark's players" or "youth." Who brought us Smiff, huh? Maybe this is the year CP breaks through to the top of the league. Great. But he got caught with his pants down around his ankles several times in '14 and '15, because the Pac12 is way tougher to navigate week in and week out than the MW. Very seldom will there be cupcakes in Pac12 league like in the MW. And that's why CP was 92-12 and not 72-30, which is still fucking great and justifies hiring him.

Jesus Christ, are we really arguing the MW is equal in strength to the Pac12?

Uh Turd, those are the facts. This team was on par with ty's 0-12 team when Pete took over. Cyress was that bad. This team would have won 4 games last year with Sark and maybe 5-6 next year. Those are more facts.

4 in a row??!?!!

5/6 is still pretty good. Pumpy is like the SEC of butthurt doog pressing.

Pup: Did you read my post about 3 or 4 back where I sa

puppylove_sugarsteel said:

show previous quotes

TurdBuffer said:

@Ice_Holmvik: I get it's a process. But we're still not seeing the big, important wins. UW's been "on the upswing" or "building" or "doing it the right way" ever since 2008. It's now 2016. Sark had his best, 9 win season before he left, but everyone knows that season's schedule had more to do with win #9 than team improvement. Truth is, UW plateaued under Sark, still losing the big games and going to shit-tier bowls.

CP is different, and recruiting is a great indicator of internal program strength. But the red flag-wearing elephant in the room is Smiff. That's the one, big decision that I question CP's reasoning on. The Tedford hire may yield positive results, but it also shines a spotlight on the truck full of "special needs" equipment and support Smiff requires, which is like dumping thousands into a jalopy car worth $500.

Point that I agree with Race and iDawg about, is that nobody should be sporting a sweat pants boner anymore, until we see UW beating at least 3 of 4 Cali teams, both AZ's and of course, Oregon. And we can't get there with the best D in the conference. We need a potent offense, not a weak, troubled, dysfunctional passing game that makes UW one dimensional like last year.

This could be "the year," but fans have been saying that since 2008. CP's a big boy, paid a lot of money, in his third year of doing a job he says he always wanted. It's show me time. No more boner teases.

The past has nothing to do with it turd. . You are as bad as base. Your narrative is stale, uninformed, poorly laid out and fucktarded beyond understanding.

Its official Turd, youve been escorted to gate. Not getting back on Pupwagon next year.

Pup: When I wrote "I think we're done here" about 5 posts ago, I meant, "I think we're done here." No need to keep high-jacking other threads to repeat your CP boner-popper points. CP makes you hard as a rock. Got it. 100 posts ago. I like CP, too. Just not in that way.

TierbsHsotBoobs said:

show previous quotes

HuskyInAZ said:

Fire_Marshall_Bill said:

TurdBuffer said:

Fire_Marshall_Bill said:

TierbsHsotBoobs said:

puppylove_sugarsteel said:

TurdBuffer said:

EwaDawg said:

dnc said:

PurpleJ said:

Yeah and we had a GREAT defense and only went 7-6 (4-5). The metrics are pointing up. Pete sure did a hell of a job last year.

I know you're being sarcasmic but everything you said before the final sentence is true.

Pete is good at developing talent. In game coaching? He can get better.

True and accurate. Pac12 is way tougher, top to bottom, than the MW, where many of Pete's wins were in his pocket before the game started. Context matters for expectations.

Pete's #1 quality is as a sideline coach Turd. WTF, do you even watch college football? . 92-12 before he got to UW pretty much backs it up. I watched every notable game Pete coached at bsu. Simply a master in big games. Sometimes puppy just shakes his head at some of the shit that dribbles out your cunts out here (hi kim)

92-12 proved that he could inherit the dominant program in the WAC and beat retards.

Oklahomo, Oregon two years in a row, virgin tech, tcu twice, georgia Oregon st

Bill: You did not write Oregon State. No, you didn't. My eyes deceive me, right?

I don't understand all the hurt butts about CP. I'm a fan, and I believe we're watching him grow into a top-tier Pac12 coach. But he's not there yet so stop dumping 100% of the fault on "Sark's players" or "youth." Who brought us Smiff, huh? Maybe this is the year CP breaks through to the top of the league. Great. But he got caught with his pants down around his ankles several times in '14 and '15, because the Pac12 is way tougher to navigate week in and week out than the MW. Very seldom will there be cupcakes in Pac12 league like in the MW. And that's why CP was 92-12 and not 72-30, which is still fucking great and justifies hiring him.

Jesus Christ, are we really arguing the MW is equal in strength to the Pac12?

I'm not butt hurt.m I'm Puppy's brother, remember? Some criticism is warranted and Smith probably should have been fired, and the Sark excuse (used by tons on here, but not me) is flimsy. Youth was more legitimate. I agree, he's probably 72-30 in the Pac 12.

There are people here who are just entrenched in their own narratives and thinking from 2008 or they're just trying hard to fit and be funny (usually failing) in or not rock the boat. I'm done with that shit. Tell me I'm wrong.

You are not wrong.

Except he is wrong, unless you believe 4-5 > 4-5 > 5-4 > 5-4 > 5-4 > 5-4

Nobody knows what's going to happen. That's the fucking point. Instead of just giving up and being as negative as possible for all 8 months of the offseason, I'll choose to see what happens. Signs are pointing to something better than the usual 7 or 8 win season. If not, we know CP is just another Boise CC coach who feasted on the NM States of the world. I'm on record as saying he's at least a good coach (probably not elite like Kelly or Meyer). If he's not fine. I'm wrong occasionally.