Next Don James
Comments
-
That's a very legitimate question.DoogieMcDoogerson said:Legitimate Question, folks.
Who is a proven winner that you would go after. Look through the top 20. Give me names.
Look -- I'm as disappointed as everyone else that we just can't seem to fucking beat oregon or take the next step. I'm at a loss for who I'd hire that fits your proven winner.
Seems like you have to take a flier on a guy and wait it out for a few years and then go for the next guy if he doesn't work out.
Lots of guys have flopped or failed to pan out. This is not an easy thing to identify. Who are the no brainers that would work out better than Sark? Guys you're SURE would work out...
Looking at the top 25, I see three possibilities that UW has already missed out on (Mora, Pinkel, Andersen at Wisconsin) and one guy who fits the profile (DeRuyter).
Of equal relevance, I don't see that many guys in the top 25 who were guaranteed hits when they were hired. There's Saban, Meyer, Miles, and Spurrier.
You almost certainly have to roll the dice to get the right guy. You just have to be willing to admit you crapped out when the guy you hired clearly isn't the right guy. Keeping the wrong guy too long lets the program rot from within, which was the REAL lesson from 0-12 that very few people actually learned. -
I see your Bobby Wilder and raise you Chuck Martin. Have a glance:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chuck_Martin_(American_football)
Both Wilder and Martin have Tressel/Brian Kelly-esque backgrounds. -
Let's take a look at Mora in 2 weeks.
-
If he loses the next two games, he's still be 14-7 (8-5 conference) with no FCS patsies and in control of his own destiny to win the Pac-12.DoogieMcDoogerson said:Let's take a look at Mora in 2 weeks.
-
Not bad. He did inherit a two time national champ from Brian Kelly but he has a pretty good background. Worth an interview.Gladstone said:I see your Bobby Wilder and raise you Chuck Martin. Have a glance:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chuck_Martin_(American_football)
Both Wilder and Martin have Tressel/Brian Kelly-esque backgrounds.
-
Yes, but he will have lost to Stanford and Oregon just like Sark. The uncertainty for Mora for me is 1) can he recruit when he's based in Seattle and 2) How long will he stay for his "dream" job. That's not to say Sark is doing #1 well, but I think it's a stretch to say Mora would without question, be doing better as a recruiter. Recruiting is the job of the head guy but again, you can't argue with who Sark now has as assistants from a recruiting standpoint. Would Mora have a strong a staff of assistants? Again -- it's a crap shoot.
7-6, definitely go another direction.
8-5, you see what's on the market and possibly make a decision
9-4 or better and you stay the course.
With all that said, no matter who we get ( because the top coaches aren't reasonable targets ), we're starting over -- new coaches, new system, etc and there is considerable risk. -
9-4 this year is terrible.
-
I like Charlie Strong. He could win multiple BCS titles and still be the number 2 coach on campus, so I think he will go for the right price.
I also like Craig Bohl at NDSU. Consecutive FCS titles, including victories over FBS teams.
I have liked Gary Anderson since his defense handed Alabama in the Sugar Bowl. USU is one of the hardest places to win at in the country, and he did it, finding/developing players like Bobby Wagner and Robert Turbin in the process. He is only in his first year at Wisconsin, and stranger things have happened than a coach leaving a school after one year (like the greatest coach to ever walk the UW sideline). -
How did I end up on Dawgman?DoogieMcDoogerson said:Yes, but he will have lost to Stanford and Oregon just like Sark. The uncertainty for Mora for me is 1) can he recruit when he's based in Seattle and 2) How long will he stay for his "dream" job. That's not to say Sark is doing #1 well, but I think it's a stretch to say Mora would without question, be doing better as a recruiter. Recruiting is the job of the head guy but again, you can't argue with who Sark now has as assistants from a recruiting standpoint. Would Mora have a strong a staff of assistants? Again -- it's a crap shoot.
7-6, definitely go another direction.
8-5, you see what's on the market and possibly make a decision
9-4 or better and you stay the course.
With all that said, no matter who we get ( because the top coaches aren't reasonable targets ), we're starting over -- new coaches, new system, etc and there is considerable risk.
It's a stretch to say Mora would be doing a better job recruiting than Sark? Are you hearing that UCLA recruits itself? Here's why it's a stone cold fact that Mora is a better recruiter than Sark...count the lineman.
The staff is just more doogism. Great coaches don't need to hire good staffs, they make great staffs. If the only way Sark can be successful is if he has a great staff then UW is screwed because good assistants LEAVE! No school can just constantly turn over hired gun great assistant coaches.
Number 2 is by far the stupidest thing anyone's ever poasted. How long would Mora really stay here? Here's a hint, SARK IS LEAVING THE SECOND HE GETS A BETTER OFFER. You may think he's your boyfriend but there's 3 schools in PAC-12 alone that Sark would instantly leave UW for.
There was risk in firing Ty before 0-12. New staff, new system, blah blah blah blah.
And if Mora loses to Stanford and Oregon it'll still be year 2. And Sark will be in year 5.
I hope so much that I just got whooshed. Because that was the worst post in the history of the Internet otherwise. -
There is more risk bringing Sark back. With a new coach you are starting over but you have the chance at maybe he's the right guy.DoogieMcDoogerson said:Yes, but he will have lost to Stanford and Oregon just like Sark. The uncertainty for Mora for me is 1) can he recruit when he's based in Seattle and 2) How long will he stay for his "dream" job. That's not to say Sark is doing #1 well, but I think it's a stretch to say Mora would without question, be doing better as a recruiter. Recruiting is the job of the head guy but again, you can't argue with who Sark now has as assistants from a recruiting standpoint. Would Mora have a strong a staff of assistants? Again -- it's a crap shoot.
7-6, definitely go another direction.
8-5, you see what's on the market and possibly make a decision
9-4 or better and you stay the course.
With all that said, no matter who we get ( because the top coaches aren't reasonable targets ), we're starting over -- new coaches, new system, etc and there is considerable risk.
With Sark we know this program will never sniff a Rose Bowl or a BCS game. He can fool the fucktards with the easy OOC scheduling but he's not fooling me.
To me the Lambo years were just as bad if not worst than the Ty years. Watching Rose Bowl talent being wasted every year was awful. That is what Sark is about to do this year and next year. Then in 2015 Sark will have his Lambo 1998 year.
Mora I think appeals to everyone. He is a good enough talker, good enough salesman to sell the skill guys. He's also a tough minded, blue collar coach who is a good family man to sell to the gritty tough players.
If I'm a tough player like a OL, DL or a LB and Sark wants me to play for him or Mora wants me to play for him I'm choosing Mora. I know Mora will get the best out of me while Sark with his soft program won't get me to reach my potential.
![[Deleted User]](https://w0.vanillicon.com/0207c5b8d9863e3a221f61582bd6bfa3_100.png)
![[Deleted User]](https://wb.vanillicon.com/b14605887e2b6b59902271a0095c9265_100.png)