Boobs clearly had his eye on the future when he made this post, since it could be interpreted as either saying we didn't want Petersen, or as mockery of Teqilla.
Pretty solid troll game, thinking 34 months ahead and all.
Raise your hand if you would've agreed back in 2013?
Having acknowledged my idiocy (and to differentiate myself from Tequilla), I was good with Petersen as a second choice. Not sure I even was aware he was an option for UW.
Raise your hand if you would've agreed back in 2013?
Having acknowledged my idiocy (and to differentiate myself from Tequilla), I was good with Petersen as a second choice. Not sure I even was aware he was an option for UW.
Oh yea I wanted Mora too but was fine with Petersen.
Boobs clearly had his eye on the future when he made this post, since it could be interpreted as either saying we didn't want Petersen, or as mockery of Teqilla.
Pretty solid troll game, thinking 34 months ahead and all.
When you go back to 2013, my opinion of Chris Petersen was very different than it is today seeing the day in and day out working of him and his staff ... and thankfully I was wrong. BTW, I do think it's very rich that some of the very same people that were as vocal as possible in wanting to throw Pete out up to the beginning of this season are some of the very people jumping on my comments then ... but I'm not surprised by that ...
Back in 2013, there were a few thoughts that I had regarding Petersen at that point:
Petersen's record while at Boise of 92-12 was well known ...
For the balance of Boise's time under Pete, they were in the WAC where they really were so far heads and shoulders above everybody else in their conference it was really difficult to judge how great of a coach Pete was versus how much their talent was just far superior ...
Boise's teams had had a number of run ins with TCU ... 2 of those 12 Petersen losses were to TCU in fact. Guess who 2 more of those 12 losses were to? Washington. Of the 12 losses, only 4 of those were by more than a score ... again, 2 of those were to Washington
My general opinion of Boise when they played high end talent was that they had to come up with some kind of fluke or gimmick to win the game. That because the balance of their schedule was such a throw away in that they were going to win easily, they could spend the bulk of their time preparing for both on/off the field for those games.
And probably the 2 biggest things that I was critical of Petersen of at the time:
1) Upon moving into the Mountain West in 2011, Boise finished 2nd in the conference 2 of the 3 years ... to my point above about Boise beating up on the WAC, the fact that 7 of Pete's 12 losses came in those 3 years it made me think that the record was inflated based on the quality of opposition as much as anything.
2) In particular, Boise's 2013 season by their (and Pete's standards) was abysmal ... 2 of the 4 losses in Pete's tenure by more than a score came in that season. The season opening game against Boise was as overmatched of an opposition as I've seen tied to UW for a while (and at 2013, I was not a big fan of what Sark was doing so to get drubbed by Sark was not impressive to me) ... as was pointed out over the years by some on this board (including @RoadDawg55) that Boise's offense was becoming stale and with the 2013 downturn, it was hard to argue that.
Fortunately I was wrong. I looked only at surface level information. I had been struck a number of times at how Petersen had managed to win games with inferior talent but never really took the time to dig into the why. It's a great example of why forming an opinion prior to examining the data/evidence can be dangerous and lead you to a wrong answer. I didn't take the time to see the details and came to the wrong conclusion.
The reality is that Pete is the perfect fit for Washington. I suspect that Pete knew that as well when he pursued the job. It's quite possible that Pete had bottomed out at Boise, gotten a little bored, and was looking for the right fit. Whatever the reason(s), UW is very lucky to have Pete. I'm glad I was wrong at the time. I've got no problem saying so. I had my reasons ... some were definitive flags ... but none of those flags were unexplainable in hindsight.
And perhaps that's the lesson to all of this is that finding the right coach way more often than not is finding the right guy at the right time and not necessarily who you think. Pete Carroll was USC's 4th choice when hired. By and large he was out of football from a HC perspective. If he didn't get the SC job, he wouldn't have done what he did there and then taken the Seahawks job and done what he has done. Florida's taking on of Urban Meyer after he went undefeated at Utah was the perfect marriage of a coach with a recruiting/talent base that established him as the elite coach he is. There were so many underlying reasons why hiring Jim Mora made sense for UW ... but knowing what we know now, I think we all agree that at least at the 2013 hire, we're fortunate he didn't get the job. Don James was a little known coach prior to being hired at Washington ... then on the hottest of seats before getting to the 1977 Rose Bowl ... look at how that turned out. You just don't know ... you never know. But when you do have an elite coach at your school, you are thankful each and everyday knowing that your future is bright and when you have a down year that it is likely only temporary and not a trend.
When you go back to 2013, my opinion of Chris Petersen was very different than it is today seeing the day in and day out working of him and his staff ... and thankfully I was wrong. BTW, I do think it's very rich that some of the very same people that were as vocal as possible in wanting to throw Pete out up to the beginning of this season are some of the very people jumping on my comments then ... but I'm not surprised by that ...
Back in 2013, there were a few thoughts that I had regarding Petersen at that point:
Petersen's record while at Boise of 92-12 was well known ...
For the balance of Boise's time under Pete, they were in the WAC where they really were so far heads and shoulders above everybody else in their conference it was really difficult to judge how great of a coach Pete was versus how much their talent was just far superior ...
Boise's teams had had a number of run ins with TCU ... 2 of those 12 Petersen losses were to TCU in fact. Guess who 2 more of those 12 losses were to? Washington. Of the 12 losses, only 4 of those were by more than a score ... again, 2 of those were to Washington
My general opinion of Boise when they played high end talent was that they had to come up with some kind of fluke or gimmick to win the game. That because the balance of their schedule was such a throw away in that they were going to win easily, they could spend the bulk of their time preparing for both on/off the field for those games.
And probably the 2 biggest things that I was critical of Petersen of at the time:
1) Upon moving into the Mountain West in 2011, Boise finished 2nd in the conference 2 of the 3 years ... to my point above about Boise beating up on the WAC, the fact that 7 of Pete's 12 losses came in those 3 years it made me think that the record was inflated based on the quality of opposition as much as anything.
2) In particular, Boise's 2013 season by their (and Pete's standards) was abysmal ... 2 of the 4 losses in Pete's tenure by more than a score came in that season. The season opening game against Boise was as overmatched of an opposition as I've seen tied to UW for a while (and at 2013, I was not a big fan of what Sark was doing so to get drubbed by Sark was not impressive to me) ... as was pointed out over the years by some on this board (including @RoadDawg55) that Boise's offense was becoming stale and with the 2013 downturn, it was hard to argue that.
Fortunately I was wrong. I looked only at surface level information. I had been struck a number of times at how Petersen had managed to win games with inferior talent but never really took the time to dig into the why. It's a great example of why forming an opinion prior to examining the data/evidence can be dangerous and lead you to a wrong answer. I didn't take the time to see the details and came to the wrong conclusion.
The reality is that Pete is the perfect fit for Washington. I suspect that Pete knew that as well when he pursued the job. It's quite possible that Pete had bottomed out at Boise, gotten a little bored, and was looking for the right fit. Whatever the reason(s), UW is very lucky to have Pete. I'm glad I was wrong at the time. I've got no problem saying so. I had my reasons ... some were definitive flags ... but none of those flags were unexplainable in hindsight.
And perhaps that's the lesson to all of this is that finding the right coach way more often than not is finding the right guy at the right time and not necessarily who you think. Pete Carroll was USC's 4th choice when hired. By and large he was out of football from a HC perspective. If he didn't get the SC job, he wouldn't have done what he did there and then taken the Seahawks job and done what he has done. Florida's taking on of Urban Meyer after he went undefeated at Utah was the perfect marriage of a coach with a recruiting/talent base that established him as the elite coach he is. There were so many underlying reasons why hiring Jim Mora made sense for UW ... but knowing what we know now, I think we all agree that at least at the 2013 hire, we're fortunate he didn't get the job. Don James was a little known coach prior to being hired at Washington ... then on the hottest of seats before getting to the 1977 Rose Bowl ... look at how that turned out. You just don't know ... you never know. But when you do have an elite coach at your school, you are thankful each and everyday knowing that your future is bright and when you have a down year that it is likely only temporary and not a trend.
When you go back to 2013, my opinion of Chris Petersen was very different than it is today seeing the day in and day out working of him and his staff ... and thankfully I was wrong. BTW, I do think it's very rich that some of the very same people that were as vocal as possible in wanting to throw Pete out up to the beginning of this season are some of the very people jumping on my comments then ... but I'm not surprised by that ...
Back in 2013, there were a few thoughts that I had regarding Petersen at that point:
Petersen's record while at Boise of 92-12 was well known ...
For the balance of Boise's time under Pete, they were in the WAC where they really were so far heads and shoulders above everybody else in their conference it was really difficult to judge how great of a coach Pete was versus how much their talent was just far superior ...
Boise's teams had had a number of run ins with TCU ... 2 of those 12 Petersen losses were to TCU in fact. Guess who 2 more of those 12 losses were to? Washington. Of the 12 losses, only 4 of those were by more than a score ... again, 2 of those were to Washington
My general opinion of Boise when they played high end talent was that they had to come up with some kind of fluke or gimmick to win the game. That because the balance of their schedule was such a throw away in that they were going to win easily, they could spend the bulk of their time preparing for both on/off the field for those games.
And probably the 2 biggest things that I was critical of Petersen of at the time:
1) Upon moving into the Mountain West in 2011, Boise finished 2nd in the conference 2 of the 3 years ... to my point above about Boise beating up on the WAC, the fact that 7 of Pete's 12 losses came in those 3 years it made me think that the record was inflated based on the quality of opposition as much as anything.
2) In particular, Boise's 2013 season by their (and Pete's standards) was abysmal ... 2 of the 4 losses in Pete's tenure by more than a score came in that season. The season opening game against Boise was as overmatched of an opposition as I've seen tied to UW for a while (and at 2013, I was not a big fan of what Sark was doing so to get drubbed by Sark was not impressive to me) ... as was pointed out over the years by some on this board (including @RoadDawg55) that Boise's offense was becoming stale and with the 2013 downturn, it was hard to argue that.
Fortunately I was wrong. I looked only at surface level information. I had been struck a number of times at how Petersen had managed to win games with inferior talent but never really took the time to dig into the why. It's a great example of why forming an opinion prior to examining the data/evidence can be dangerous and lead you to a wrong answer. I didn't take the time to see the details and came to the wrong conclusion.
The reality is that Pete is the perfect fit for Washington. I suspect that Pete knew that as well when he pursued the job. It's quite possible that Pete had bottomed out at Boise, gotten a little bored, and was looking for the right fit. Whatever the reason(s), UW is very lucky to have Pete. I'm glad I was wrong at the time. I've got no problem saying so. I had my reasons ... some were definitive flags ... but none of those flags were unexplainable in hindsight.
And perhaps that's the lesson to all of this is that finding the right coach way more often than not is finding the right guy at the right time and not necessarily who you think. Pete Carroll was USC's 4th choice when hired. By and large he was out of football from a HC perspective. If he didn't get the SC job, he wouldn't have done what he did there and then taken the Seahawks job and done what he has done. Florida's taking on of Urban Meyer after he went undefeated at Utah was the perfect marriage of a coach with a recruiting/talent base that established him as the elite coach he is. There were so many underlying reasons why hiring Jim Mora made sense for UW ... but knowing what we know now, I think we all agree that at least at the 2013 hire, we're fortunate he didn't get the job. Don James was a little known coach prior to being hired at Washington ... then on the hottest of seats before getting to the 1977 Rose Bowl ... look at how that turned out. You just don't know ... you never know. But when you do have an elite coach at your school, you are thankful each and everyday knowing that your future is bright and when you have a down year that it is likely only temporary and not a trend.
When you go back to 2013, my opinion of Chris Petersen was very different than it is today seeing the day in and day out working of him and his staff ... and thankfully I was wrong. BTW, I do think it's very rich that some of the very same people that were as vocal as possible in wanting to throw Pete out up to the beginning of this season are some of the very people jumping on my comments then ... but I'm not surprised by that ...
Back in 2013, there were a few thoughts that I had regarding Petersen at that point:
Petersen's record while at Boise of 92-12 was well known ...
For the balance of Boise's time under Pete, they were in the WAC where they really were so far heads and shoulders above everybody else in their conference it was really difficult to judge how great of a coach Pete was versus how much their talent was just far superior ...
Boise's teams had had a number of run ins with TCU ... 2 of those 12 Petersen losses were to TCU in fact. Guess who 2 more of those 12 losses were to? Washington. Of the 12 losses, only 4 of those were by more than a score ... again, 2 of those were to Washington
My general opinion of Boise when they played high end talent was that they had to come up with some kind of fluke or gimmick to win the game. That because the balance of their schedule was such a throw away in that they were going to win easily, they could spend the bulk of their time preparing for both on/off the field for those games.
And probably the 2 biggest things that I was critical of Petersen of at the time:
1) Upon moving into the Mountain West in 2011, Boise finished 2nd in the conference 2 of the 3 years ... to my point above about Boise beating up on the WAC, the fact that 7 of Pete's 12 losses came in those 3 years it made me think that the record was inflated based on the quality of opposition as much as anything.
2) In particular, Boise's 2013 season by their (and Pete's standards) was abysmal ... 2 of the 4 losses in Pete's tenure by more than a score came in that season. The season opening game against Boise was as overmatched of an opposition as I've seen tied to UW for a while (and at 2013, I was not a big fan of what Sark was doing so to get drubbed by Sark was not impressive to me) ... as was pointed out over the years by some on this board (including @RoadDawg55) that Boise's offense was becoming stale and with the 2013 downturn, it was hard to argue that.
Fortunately I was wrong. I looked only at surface level information. I had been struck a number of times at how Petersen had managed to win games with inferior talent but never really took the time to dig into the why. It's a great example of why forming an opinion prior to examining the data/evidence can be dangerous and lead you to a wrong answer. I didn't take the time to see the details and came to the wrong conclusion.
The reality is that Pete is the perfect fit for Washington. I suspect that Pete knew that as well when he pursued the job. It's quite possible that Pete had bottomed out at Boise, gotten a little bored, and was looking for the right fit. Whatever the reason(s), UW is very lucky to have Pete. I'm glad I was wrong at the time. I've got no problem saying so. I had my reasons ... some were definitive flags ... but none of those flags were unexplainable in hindsight.
And perhaps that's the lesson to all of this is that finding the right coach way more often than not is finding the right guy at the right time and not necessarily who you think. Pete Carroll was USC's 4th choice when hired. By and large he was out of football from a HC perspective. If he didn't get the SC job, he wouldn't have done what he did there and then taken the Seahawks job and done what he has done. Florida's taking on of Urban Meyer after he went undefeated at Utah was the perfect marriage of a coach with a recruiting/talent base that established him as the elite coach he is. There were so many underlying reasons why hiring Jim Mora made sense for UW ... but knowing what we know now, I think we all agree that at least at the 2013 hire, we're fortunate he didn't get the job. Don James was a little known coach prior to being hired at Washington ... then on the hottest of seats before getting to the 1977 Rose Bowl ... look at how that turned out. You just don't know ... you never know. But when you do have an elite coach at your school, you are thankful each and everyday knowing that your future is bright and when you have a down year that it is likely only temporary and not a trend.
When you go back to 2013, my opinion of Chris Petersen was very different than it is today seeing the day in and day out working of him and his staff ... and thankfully I was wrong. BTW, I do think it's very rich that some of the very same people that were as vocal as possible in wanting to throw Pete out up to the beginning of this season are some of the very people jumping on my comments then ... but I'm not surprised by that ...
Back in 2013, there were a few thoughts that I had regarding Petersen at that point:
Petersen's record while at Boise of 92-12 was well known ...
For the balance of Boise's time under Pete, they were in the WAC where they really were so far heads and shoulders above everybody else in their conference it was really difficult to judge how great of a coach Pete was versus how much their talent was just far superior ...
Boise's teams had had a number of run ins with TCU ... 2 of those 12 Petersen losses were to TCU in fact. Guess who 2 more of those 12 losses were to? Washington. Of the 12 losses, only 4 of those were by more than a score ... again, 2 of those were to Washington
My general opinion of Boise when they played high end talent was that they had to come up with some kind of fluke or gimmick to win the game. That because the balance of their schedule was such a throw away in that they were going to win easily, they could spend the bulk of their time preparing for both on/off the field for those games.
And probably the 2 biggest things that I was critical of Petersen of at the time:
1) Upon moving into the Mountain West in 2011, Boise finished 2nd in the conference 2 of the 3 years ... to my point above about Boise beating up on the WAC, the fact that 7 of Pete's 12 losses came in those 3 years it made me think that the record was inflated based on the quality of opposition as much as anything.
2) In particular, Boise's 2013 season by their (and Pete's standards) was abysmal ... 2 of the 4 losses in Pete's tenure by more than a score came in that season. The season opening game against Boise was as overmatched of an opposition as I've seen tied to UW for a while (and at 2013, I was not a big fan of what Sark was doing so to get drubbed by Sark was not impressive to me) ... as was pointed out over the years by some on this board (including @RoadDawg55) that Boise's offense was becoming stale and with the 2013 downturn, it was hard to argue that.
Fortunately I was wrong. I looked only at surface level information. I had been struck a number of times at how Petersen had managed to win games with inferior talent but never really took the time to dig into the why. It's a great example of why forming an opinion prior to examining the data/evidence can be dangerous and lead you to a wrong answer. I didn't take the time to see the details and came to the wrong conclusion.
The reality is that Pete is the perfect fit for Washington. I suspect that Pete knew that as well when he pursued the job. It's quite possible that Pete had bottomed out at Boise, gotten a little bored, and was looking for the right fit. Whatever the reason(s), UW is very lucky to have Pete. I'm glad I was wrong at the time. I've got no problem saying so. I had my reasons ... some were definitive flags ... but none of those flags were unexplainable in hindsight.
And perhaps that's the lesson to all of this is that finding the right coach way more often than not is finding the right guy at the right time and not necessarily who you think. Pete Carroll was USC's 4th choice when hired. By and large he was out of football from a HC perspective. If he didn't get the SC job, he wouldn't have done what he did there and then taken the Seahawks job and done what he has done. Florida's taking on of Urban Meyer after he went undefeated at Utah was the perfect marriage of a coach with a recruiting/talent base that established him as the elite coach he is. There were so many underlying reasons why hiring Jim Mora made sense for UW ... but knowing what we know now, I think we all agree that at least at the 2013 hire, we're fortunate he didn't get the job. Don James was a little known coach prior to being hired at Washington ... then on the hottest of seats before getting to the 1977 Rose Bowl ... look at how that turned out. You just don't know ... you never know. But when you do have an elite coach at your school, you are thankful each and everyday knowing that your future is bright and when you have a down year that it is likely only temporary and not a trend.
Could you expand on your thoughts a little bit?
Blowhard gonna blowhard.
Disagree
I always try to hold myself accountable ... most make excuses (if applicable) or try to brush to the side like it never happened
There are many that had the never Pete opinion ... I bet few (if any) will hold themselves accountable to their opinions and say why/how they were wrong
When you go back to 2013, my opinion of Chris Petersen was very different than it is today seeing the day in and day out working of him and his staff ... and thankfully I was wrong. BTW, I do think it's very rich that some of the very same people that were as vocal as possible in wanting to throw Pete out up to the beginning of this season are some of the very people jumping on my comments then ... but I'm not surprised by that ...
Back in 2013, there were a few thoughts that I had regarding Petersen at that point:
Petersen's record while at Boise of 92-12 was well known ...
For the balance of Boise's time under Pete, they were in the WAC where they really were so far heads and shoulders above everybody else in their conference it was really difficult to judge how great of a coach Pete was versus how much their talent was just far superior ...
Boise's teams had had a number of run ins with TCU ... 2 of those 12 Petersen losses were to TCU in fact. Guess who 2 more of those 12 losses were to? Washington. Of the 12 losses, only 4 of those were by more than a score ... again, 2 of those were to Washington
My general opinion of Boise when they played high end talent was that they had to come up with some kind of fluke or gimmick to win the game. That because the balance of their schedule was such a throw away in that they were going to win easily, they could spend the bulk of their time preparing for both on/off the field for those games.
And probably the 2 biggest things that I was critical of Petersen of at the time:
1) Upon moving into the Mountain West in 2011, Boise finished 2nd in the conference 2 of the 3 years ... to my point above about Boise beating up on the WAC, the fact that 7 of Pete's 12 losses came in those 3 years it made me think that the record was inflated based on the quality of opposition as much as anything.
2) In particular, Boise's 2013 season by their (and Pete's standards) was abysmal ... 2 of the 4 losses in Pete's tenure by more than a score came in that season. The season opening game against Boise was as overmatched of an opposition as I've seen tied to UW for a while (and at 2013, I was not a big fan of what Sark was doing so to get drubbed by Sark was not impressive to me) ... as was pointed out over the years by some on this board (including @RoadDawg55) that Boise's offense was becoming stale and with the 2013 downturn, it was hard to argue that.
Fortunately I was wrong. I looked only at surface level information. I had been struck a number of times at how Petersen had managed to win games with inferior talent but never really took the time to dig into the why. It's a great example of why forming an opinion prior to examining the data/evidence can be dangerous and lead you to a wrong answer. I didn't take the time to see the details and came to the wrong conclusion.
The reality is that Pete is the perfect fit for Washington. I suspect that Pete knew that as well when he pursued the job. It's quite possible that Pete had bottomed out at Boise, gotten a little bored, and was looking for the right fit. Whatever the reason(s), UW is very lucky to have Pete. I'm glad I was wrong at the time. I've got no problem saying so. I had my reasons ... some were definitive flags ... but none of those flags were unexplainable in hindsight.
And perhaps that's the lesson to all of this is that finding the right coach way more often than not is finding the right guy at the right time and not necessarily who you think. Pete Carroll was USC's 4th choice when hired. By and large he was out of football from a HC perspective. If he didn't get the SC job, he wouldn't have done what he did there and then taken the Seahawks job and done what he has done. Florida's taking on of Urban Meyer after he went undefeated at Utah was the perfect marriage of a coach with a recruiting/talent base that established him as the elite coach he is. There were so many underlying reasons why hiring Jim Mora made sense for UW ... but knowing what we know now, I think we all agree that at least at the 2013 hire, we're fortunate he didn't get the job. Don James was a little known coach prior to being hired at Washington ... then on the hottest of seats before getting to the 1977 Rose Bowl ... look at how that turned out. You just don't know ... you never know. But when you do have an elite coach at your school, you are thankful each and everyday knowing that your future is bright and when you have a down year that it is likely only temporary and not a trend.
I like giving you shit, but truth is, if people bumped every thread where something I said went awry or was just flat out wrong, Vanilla would crash under the strain. (queer winkie face)
Comments
Pretty solid troll game, thinking 34 months ahead and all.
Raise your hand if you would've agreed back in 2013?
Having acknowledged my idiocy (and to differentiate myself from Tequilla), I was good with Petersen as a second choice. Not sure I even was aware he was an option for UW.
Back in 2013, there were a few thoughts that I had regarding Petersen at that point:
Petersen's record while at Boise of 92-12 was well known ...
For the balance of Boise's time under Pete, they were in the WAC where they really were so far heads and shoulders above everybody else in their conference it was really difficult to judge how great of a coach Pete was versus how much their talent was just far superior ...
Boise's teams had had a number of run ins with TCU ... 2 of those 12 Petersen losses were to TCU in fact. Guess who 2 more of those 12 losses were to? Washington. Of the 12 losses, only 4 of those were by more than a score ... again, 2 of those were to Washington
My general opinion of Boise when they played high end talent was that they had to come up with some kind of fluke or gimmick to win the game. That because the balance of their schedule was such a throw away in that they were going to win easily, they could spend the bulk of their time preparing for both on/off the field for those games.
And probably the 2 biggest things that I was critical of Petersen of at the time:
1) Upon moving into the Mountain West in 2011, Boise finished 2nd in the conference 2 of the 3 years ... to my point above about Boise beating up on the WAC, the fact that 7 of Pete's 12 losses came in those 3 years it made me think that the record was inflated based on the quality of opposition as much as anything.
2) In particular, Boise's 2013 season by their (and Pete's standards) was abysmal ... 2 of the 4 losses in Pete's tenure by more than a score came in that season. The season opening game against Boise was as overmatched of an opposition as I've seen tied to UW for a while (and at 2013, I was not a big fan of what Sark was doing so to get drubbed by Sark was not impressive to me) ... as was pointed out over the years by some on this board (including @RoadDawg55) that Boise's offense was becoming stale and with the 2013 downturn, it was hard to argue that.
Fortunately I was wrong. I looked only at surface level information. I had been struck a number of times at how Petersen had managed to win games with inferior talent but never really took the time to dig into the why. It's a great example of why forming an opinion prior to examining the data/evidence can be dangerous and lead you to a wrong answer. I didn't take the time to see the details and came to the wrong conclusion.
The reality is that Pete is the perfect fit for Washington. I suspect that Pete knew that as well when he pursued the job. It's quite possible that Pete had bottomed out at Boise, gotten a little bored, and was looking for the right fit. Whatever the reason(s), UW is very lucky to have Pete. I'm glad I was wrong at the time. I've got no problem saying so. I had my reasons ... some were definitive flags ... but none of those flags were unexplainable in hindsight.
And perhaps that's the lesson to all of this is that finding the right coach way more often than not is finding the right guy at the right time and not necessarily who you think. Pete Carroll was USC's 4th choice when hired. By and large he was out of football from a HC perspective. If he didn't get the SC job, he wouldn't have done what he did there and then taken the Seahawks job and done what he has done. Florida's taking on of Urban Meyer after he went undefeated at Utah was the perfect marriage of a coach with a recruiting/talent base that established him as the elite coach he is. There were so many underlying reasons why hiring Jim Mora made sense for UW ... but knowing what we know now, I think we all agree that at least at the 2013 hire, we're fortunate he didn't get the job. Don James was a little known coach prior to being hired at Washington ... then on the hottest of seats before getting to the 1977 Rose Bowl ... look at how that turned out. You just don't know ... you never know. But when you do have an elite coach at your school, you are thankful each and everyday knowing that your future is bright and when you have a down year that it is likely only temporary and not a trend.
Love ya @Swaye
I always try to hold myself accountable ... most make excuses (if applicable) or try to brush to the side like it never happened
There are many that had the never Pete opinion ... I bet few (if any) will hold themselves accountable to their opinions and say why/how they were wrong