Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
Auburndawg believes the following: (deserves its own thread)
Comments
-
Using the total wins is a horrible idea in the age of pussified 13 (or 14) game schedules.
Look at the conference records instead if you want to judge Sark's ability to fulfill the aspirations of the program:
4-5
5-4
5-4
5-4
1-2
Three years was enough for people with half a brain to know Sark wasn't good enough, and all remaining doubt was removed with that magical Lather, Rinse, Repeat 2012 season.
That's why we all knew the 2013 season was over before it began. The 2014 season is also already over unless Sark gets fired after the 2013 Apple Cup. -
UW is halfway through the season. They have no chance at winning their division. Please define competing for a league champion within those parameters.Auburndawg said:What does the word compete mean? It may turn out that we come closer to Oregon than anyone else does.
If he wins 9 or 10 games you really think he should be fired? We have only won 10 games 12 times in our history.
LIPO
UW plays more games per season than they did when the program was strong. That takes the shine off 10 wins. UWs ooc schedule was the softest I can remember. That takes the shine off 10 wins.
I hope Sark wins 10 games. So all you doogs can jizz in your pants and he can get a lifetime contract. And then one day, years from now, we can all look back on career record and see that 10 wins stands out like a sore thumb. Just like when you look at Tys record. Because Sark is Ty and Ty is Sark. -
to me this means the minimum standard this year is 9 total wins, but 10 is what would show real improvement and progress.
So you are ok with Sark only winning 9 games and in the process failing to show real improvement and progress?
Your "standard" is to accept failure to succeed and now failure to show "real improvement and progress".
You are full of shit, explain away your double speak. IMO the reason you sound like a fusktard is because in a single sentence you yell "NO EXCUSES" all while hedging your expectations. -
But he's done a great job recruiting coming off 0-12 then 7-6.
Everyone says so. -
Look guys we weren't happy in the Lambright years and he even had a Co-Conference championship and a 2nd place finish. Plus finished two seasons ranked.
We were also right not to be happy with Lambright because the program was finishing 4th in conference way too much.
This is what Sark is doing now. With Lambright the program probably never misses a bowl game and would have been steady. You also would have never won a Rose Bowl then popped off.
Even though she was a bad A.D. why I have to say Hedges > Pool Boy because she made the decision to sack Lambright then go get a proven, young successful coach from a big school at the time in Neuheisel.
You know how she got him? She made him the 3rd highest paid coach in the nation behind only Bowden and Spurrier. UW won the Rose Bowl in two years after going 6-6.
Until Pool Boy can make a move like that I'll always say Hedges > Pool Boy. -
That's a deflection from what I am saying and you know it. The question you don't tackle is how Oregon is doing what you wish UW could do while missing on two of your three criteria.Auburndawg said:
So with the right coach, Oregon State or WSU can become a consistent top tier program?Canard said:The job of the CFB coach is to get his school to its proper level of performance- what it should achieve given the Iron Laws: Location, Tradition, Money.
Winning season and a bowl game every year. Check for the Ducks.
Competing for the league championship most years. Check.
Competing for a national championship once or twiceper decadeevery three years. Check.
Your so-called "iron laws" are fucktarded.
Maybe in light of yours and UCLA's titanic struggles with modern relevancy despite money, location, and tradition, your "iron laws" should perhaps become the following:
Money.
AD COMPETENCE.
COACHING COMPETENCE, &
FACILITIES.
We have all four, you have two. Stanford has all four and UCLA has two. OSU has .75 in coaching and that's it. Wazzu is stuck on one with Moos.
Been to Stillwater, OK? If T. B. Pickens transformed that shithole into a Fiesta Bowl winning program, with cash, hookers and blow, then all Wazzu needs is a Daddy Warbucks. Location and tradition count for squat in the face of truckloads of competently spent cash and world class facilities. Mix in actually good coaching and stand back.
UW will go nowhere near "elite" while missing badly in the competence categories. That you can't see that Woodward and Sark are basically the left tit and right tit of the feminization of your football program, there's no helping you. -
Who is Auburndawg? We only have Auburndoog/AuburnDawgFuckingStupid.
-
12 game seasons + a bowl game + game(s) vs. FCS opponents = A coach should average 10 wins/year at REAL Washington.
-
-
Sark just needs more time to recover from the 2010 7-6 season, the 2011 7-6 season, and the 2012 7-6 season.MikeDamone said:But he's done a great job recruiting coming off 0-12 then 7-6.
Everyone says so.
![[Deleted User]](https://wb.vanillicon.com/b14605887e2b6b59902271a0095c9265_100.png)
