Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
"It takes time" vs facts
Comments
-
where did you guys find Hugh's missing nerd machine?
-
Good stat and even misleading towards the "it takes time crowd" as it includes guys like Saban who turned Bama around in only year two.
If you have a great coach then you damn well make sure he never leaves. If he is an average coach which is what we have then he needs to go. -
Question: Are all General threads also listed on the Hardcore Bored? It's a bit confusing.
-
Great point.He_Needs_More_Time said:Good stat and even misleading towards the "it takes time crowd" as it includes guys like Saban who turned Bama around in only year two.
If you have a great coach then you damn well make sure he never leaves. If he is an average coach which is what we have then he needs to go.
-
Ahem. We all know that it takes more than time to build a football program, a lot more. Any coach who claims otherwise with a "just needed more time" excuse isn't worth another paycheck. In Sark we have a head football coach who doesn't care about time in the sense of how many seasons it might take him to build a championship caliber program. I think this is obvious because:
1) Sark wasted three years by hiring a defensive coaching staff who couldn't or wouldn't build a Pac-12 caliber defense. Overall, Sark started his football program at UW in a non-time sensitive mode by hiring too many assistants not capable of coaching football outside the Palouse, WAC, or Big Sky.
2) Sark wasted what appears to be a significant part of the four seasons spent in developing his Husky offense by changing it before season five to a Kellyish no-huddle, hurry-up fucking mess, thus dumbing down his program to one of the most penalized and painful(at least for me) in division IA collegiate football.
3) Sark's recruiting methods are squirrelish and focused on signing beach-boy athletes to scholarships who are too small to play with the big boys on the line-of-scrimmage and not fast or quick enough to play WR or DB. Wasted football scholarships = wasted time.
There are probably other signs which indicate that Sark is a lazy coach sheparding a lackadaisical Husky Football program along at a moderate pace that at least for the time being should not be expected to hurry to the top of the Pac-12. But the uneven recruiting along with changes in staff and offensive scheme where Sark's guru powers are suppose to be strongest,...... are the most obvious indications that our young head coach has the slows. God knows why, but the pressure can't be on him to get better.
-
"Yeah but none of these teams were 0-12"
-
Cutcliffe shows that it takes 6 years to win 8+ games at FUCKING DUKE (there's an outside chance they win 10 this season).
Doogs are pretty happy if Sark wins just 8 in Year 5 at FUCKING WASHINGTON
-
Art Briles took over a Baylor team that went 0-8 in conference in 2007. They were 6-18 in conference the previous 3 years before that 0-8 team.... They were BAYLOR. A perennial college football doormat, much like Duke. It took Briles 6 years to get them where they are today at #3 in the country...
Duke and Baylor are schools where it takes 6 years to win 10 games. It doesn't take 6 fucking years to win 10 games at UW. -
I don't know whether to laugh or cry anymore with numbers and evidence that is increasing by the day and more convincing to anyone who isn't a doog or involved in the AD or upper campus. Thanks for ruining my Saturdays in the fall for the last decade. If you can put a winner in place to coach the soccer, volleyball, cross country, and softball teams, then why in the fuck do you neglect the golden goose of them all?
-
Excellent assemblage of statistics. However, none of these programs experienced the "damage that Ty did". So by doog logic, these facts are irrelevant.
Which happens to be the #1 problem with doogs...facts are simply irrelevant to them.





