Question for the Sark is a great recruiter crowd
![[Deleted User]](https://wb.vanillicon.com/b14605887e2b6b59902271a0095c9265_100.png)
So why is Oregon still boat racing UW in Sark's 5th year? I keep hearing Doogs say "Look we just aren't on their level yet. We are getting there but they are just on another level".
Why is that? I mean Sark has been here for five years. I could maybe buy that excuse in year two but not in year five. These are all his guys other than Price.
So either Sark isn't a great recruiter like everyone claims or he is shitty at developing talent. It's one or the other.
BTW not that scout rankings are the be all end all but here it goes.
2010:
Oregon- 13
UW- 11
2011:
Oregon- 13
UW- 22
2012:
Oregon- 15
UW- 23
2013:
Oregon- 17
UW- 13
So Oregon has slightly out recruited UW but it's not a huge margin. I know why our media won't ask this question but it's frustrating why they don't bring up how lack of player development is a huge problem at Washington.
Josh Shirley is basically a non factor this year as a junior. ASJ and Kasen aren't these 5 star studs like we thought we were getting. There isn't one OL in year five that you can say without a doubt this guy is going to play on Sunday's.
It just pisses me off these fucks accept that "Oh well, Oregon is more talented than we are" while not asking why is that in year five?!!
Comments
-
Oregon recruits what fits their system, while UW recruits scouting stars. There's the difference.
-
Oregon's top recruit involve lineman, that's the difference
-
Then he's shitty at developing talent. Either way it's year five so he's either not this "great" recruiter that Doogs say he is or he sucks at player development.greenblood said:Oregon recruits what fits their system, while UW recruits scouting stars. There's the difference.
This topic is NEVER fucking addressed though ever. Bring it up with Doogs and they dodge this topic all together or give some bullshit how the talent is there then name drop all our skill players while not realizing not one lineman is NFL besides Danny Shelton. -
Then he's shitty at developing talent (AND evaluating talent - see Mariotta)
-
There has been no offensive or defensive identity. Without that, it makes it hard to recruit the right talent.
-
You act like 0-12 never happened.
-
In his five years he'll have had only one OL drafted to the NFL and that was a Ty recruit. That is fucking pathetic!
-
linemen, player development, and discipline
As much as I pray for Autism Stadium to be bombed, ever since that Boise State game, Oregon has been a f****** machine. Only Ohio St, Auburn, Stanford, LSU, And a couple others tripped them up. They never blow games to inferior opponents. They never beat themselves. It's like the Patriots of cfb. -
Parents of autistic children and big time terrorists read this bored. Clean it up.Fire_Marshall_Bill said:linemen, player development, and discipline
As much as I pray for Autism Stadium to be bombed, ever since that Boise State game, Oregon has been a f****** machine. Only Ohio St, Auburn, Stanford, LSU, And a couple others tripped them up. They never blow games to inferior opponents. They never beat themselves. It's like the Patriots of cfb. -
From a guy on Dawgman who I think posts here:
Recruiting Rankings
UW UO
2010 11 13
2011 22 13
2012 23 15
2013 13 17
Avg 17.25 14.5
The biggest difference during that time:
Offensive and defensive line 4-5 star recruits: UW = 7, UO = 15.
Offensive and defensive line 2 star recruits: UW = 8, UO = 1 -
Stan Empterman was a 2 star.HeretoBeatmyChest said:From a guy on Dawgman who I think posts here:
Recruiting Rankings
UW UO
2010 11 13
2011 22 13
2012 23 15
2013 13 17
Avg 17.25 14.5
The biggest difference during that time:
Offensive and defensive line 4-5 star recruits: UW = 7, UO = 15.
Offensive and defensive line 2 star recruits: UW = 8, UO = 1
-
CHRIST!HeretoBeatmyChest said:From a guy on Dawgman who I think posts here:
Recruiting Rankings
UW UO
2010 11 13
2011 22 13
2012 23 15
2013 13 17
Avg 17.25 14.5
The biggest difference during that time:
Offensive and defensive line 4-5 star recruits: UW = 7, UO = 15.
Offensive and defensive line 2 star recruits: UW = 8, UO = 1
Plus a bulk of those 4-5 star recruits on the line have all busted like Kohler, Hatchie, Potoe, etc. -
Yep Time. Exactly my thought. Take away the 2010 class and OL recruiting has been a dreck fest- and thats no hyperbole.
-
Ding ding ding. We have a fucking winner.HeretoBeatmyChest said:From a guy on Dawgman who I think posts here:
Recruiting Rankings
UW UO
2010 11 13
2011 22 13
2012 23 15
2013 13 17
Avg 17.25 14.5
The biggest difference during that time:
Offensive and defensive line 4-5 star recruits: UW = 7, UO = 15.
Offensive and defensive line 2 star recruits: UW = 8, UO = 1
Don't post this common sense over on Doogman though. Kim will have a Mexico beach's amount of sand in his cunt and Ektard will tell you that Sark is trying REALLY, REALLY hard to get linemen. -
Oh its poasted alright. And the Sark supporters came en masse to support their "great recruiter and best play caller in America" who offers 20+ lineman a year. Ektard's silence in the thread after that poast speaks volumes.CheersWestDawg said:
Ding ding ding. We have a fucking winner.HeretoBeatmyChest said:From a guy on Dawgman who I think posts here:
Recruiting Rankings
UW UO
2010 11 13
2011 22 13
2012 23 15
2013 13 17
Avg 17.25 14.5
The biggest difference during that time:
Offensive and defensive line 4-5 star recruits: UW = 7, UO = 15.
Offensive and defensive line 2 star recruits: UW = 8, UO = 1
Don't post this common sense over on Doogman though. Kim will have a Mexico beach's amount of sand in his cunt and Ektard will tell you that Sark is trying REALLY, REALLY hard to get linemen.
Who the fuck rates their closing success on 'offers'? The doogiest of doogs or just shitty salesmen? I am not in sales but I will go out on a limb and say that sales managers could give a flying f how many offers their staff makes- its about closing. Shart is not a closer. Period.
-
Always.MisterEm said:
Oh its poasted alright. And the Sark supporters came en masse to support their "great recruiter and best play caller in America" who offers 20+ lineman a year. Ektard's silence in the thread after that poast speaks volumes.CheersWestDawg said:
Ding ding ding. We have a fucking winner.HeretoBeatmyChest said:From a guy on Dawgman who I think posts here:
Recruiting Rankings
UW UO
2010 11 13
2011 22 13
2012 23 15
2013 13 17
Avg 17.25 14.5
The biggest difference during that time:
Offensive and defensive line 4-5 star recruits: UW = 7, UO = 15.
Offensive and defensive line 2 star recruits: UW = 8, UO = 1
Don't post this common sense over on Doogman though. Kim will have a Mexico beach's amount of sand in his cunt and Ektard will tell you that Sark is trying REALLY, REALLY hard to get linemen.
Who the fuck rates their closing success on 'offers'? The doogiest of doogs or just shitty salesmen? I am not in sales but I will go out on a limb and say that sales managers could give a flying f how many offers their staff makes- its about closing. Shart is not a closer. Period.
Be.
Closing. -
No coffee for Sark. Coffee is for closers.
-
The worst part is there are still fucktards at doogman who ignore this and say if we had Mariota instead of Price we would have won. Oregon may have slightly better skill guys, but ours are very good. You can fucking win with those guys. Mariota is significantly better than Price, but once again, you can win with Price. He's a good QB. If we switched DL's with Oregon, Price would have all day to throw and pick apart defenses, and Mariota would look a lot worse.HeretoBeatmyChest said:From a guy on Dawgman who I think posts here:
Recruiting Rankings
UW UO
2010 11 13
2011 22 13
2012 23 15
2013 13 17
Avg 17.25 14.5
The biggest difference during that time:
Offensive and defensive line 4-5 star recruits: UW = 7, UO = 15.
Offensive and defensive line 2 star recruits: UW = 8, UO = 1
The difference is Oregon has stocked up on the lines. They have talent and depth at the most important spots. Their DL does not get tired, they have back ups who are talented players. An injury or two doesn't derail them like it would do us. Year after year, we never fix the issue. How can we complain though, Sark offers more lineman than any other position. He's trying really hard guys.
-
The illusion of Sark's great recruiting died years ago. I don't see many people spouting that and can't understand why some of you still cling to it either. He has found a fair number of really good players, but has only been decent in terms of rankings and below average in terms of numbers and quality at the most important positions.
-
Damn. Never seen it put to numbers like that, but how can you argue? It's the same thing we've complained about, which is that the classes have always looked good on the surface, but realistically most of the stars are skill guys. These are the same guys UW got back when Rick was here. Same general type of player.
-
DeLarry said:
Damn. Never seen it put to numbers like that, but how can you argue? It's the same thing we've complained about, which is that the classes have always looked good on the surface, but realistically most of the stars are skill guys. These are the same guys UW got back when Rick was here. Same general type of player.
someone once wrote a TequillaFS long article discussing the numbers, talent and recruiting on the offensive line...
http://hardcorehusky.com/news/an-analysis-of-washingtons-offensive-line
