Facts
Inability to Win on the Road
2009: 0-5 on the road
2010: 3-3 on the road
2011: 1-4 on the road
2012: 2-4 on the road
2013: 1-3 so far
Combined record: 7-19 on the road
Huge Blowout losses each year
2009 - 43-19 loss to Oregon
2009 - 48-21 loss to Oregon State
2010 - 56-21 loss to Nebraska
2010 - 44-14 loss to Arizona
2010 - 41-0 to Stanford
2010 - 53-16 loss to Oregon
2011 - 51-38 loss to Nebraska
2011 - 65-21 loss to Stanford
2011 - 40-17 loss to USC
2012 - 41-3 loss to LSU
2012 - 52-21 loss to Oregon
2012 - 52-17 loss to Arizona
2013 - 45-24 loss to Oregon
2013 - 53-24 loss to Arizona State
A 3 or more game losing streak in the pac-12 every year
2009 - 4 games ( ASU, Oregon, UCLA, Oregon State )
2010 - 3 games ( ASU, Stanford, Oregon )
2011 - 3 games ( Oregon, USC, Oregon State )
2012 - 3 games ( Oregon, USC, Arizona )
2013 - 3 games ( Stanford, Oregon, Arizona State )
Average and not improving pac-12 record every year
2009 - 4 wins, 5 losses
2010 - 5 wins, 4 losses
2011 - 5 wins, 4 losses
2012 - 5 wins, 4 losses
2013 - 3 wins, 4 losses so far
Record versus ranked opponents
2009 - 2-3
2010 - 3-4
2011 - 0-4
2012 - 2-4
2013 - 1-3
overall 8-18
Record versus the NW
1-2
2-1
1-2
1-2
0-1 so far
5-7 record overall
Record versus Oregon
0-5
Could we really do worse with a coaching change?
Comments
-
Wow.
We know what we have.
The question now becomes ...
Do we accept it, or do we improve on it?
-
Nowhere near contending for the conference championship once in five years. Nowhere close to winning championships and Rose Bowls.
-
But he can recruit!! What would we do if we lost him? He's doing it the right way...Huge and Baird say so.
-
18-8 vs. ranked opponents, 5-7 vs. the Northwest really stand out
-
Sark has moved down the pecking order. Now top recruits will wait to see what USC and UCLA offer in addition to Oregon before committing to Sark. Once committed, coaches like Riley and Leach will pick off who they want reminding recruits Sark is a Lameduck coach with a short term contract and too few wins with an AD who has bond payments to make on revenue promised from an ever growing grumbling fan base.Sarkingham said:But he can recruit!! What would we do if we lost him? He's doing it the right way...Huge and Baird say so.
-
Wins are important, but remember, so is culture.sarktastic said:
Sark has moved down the pecking order. Now top recruits will wait to see what USC and UCLA offer in addition to Oregon before committing to Sark. Once committed, coaches like Riley and Leach will pick off who they want reminding recruits Sark is a Lameduck coach with a short term contract and too few wins with an AD who has bond payments to make on revenue promised from an ever growing grumbling fan base.Sarkingham said:But he can recruit!! What would we do if we lost him? He's doing it the right way...Huge and Baird say so.
So if those kids want to go to SC or UCLA ... or even Oregon ... let'em.
Because we have a special culture. -
should be pinned
-
Outstanding work. Posted on DM.
-
Did you guys already forget the video of him throwing fish at Pike Place Market with Romar?? You can't buy that kind of publicity.
-
Fetters said he can't debate the facts or even call them average, but there is no point to rehash negative stuff from the past. It's about where we are going.
-
So I take it Fatters likes neutral?RoadDawg55 said:Fetters said he can't debate the facts or even call them average, but there is no point to rehash negative stuff from the past. It's about where we are going.
-
Fetters likes nachos. And pie. And donuts. And Pizza. And cheeseburgers. And....fuck it, I can't keep listing all this. I'll be here for 3 straight days trying to list all the foods that Fat Fuck likes to eat.greenblood said:
So I take it Fatters likes neutral?RoadDawg55 said:Fetters said he can't debate the facts or even call them average, but there is no point to rehash negative stuff from the past. It's about where we are going.
-
In circles. That's where we are going.RoadDawg55 said:Fetters said he can't debate the facts or even call them average, but there is no point to rehash negative stuff from the past. It's about where we are going.
-
3-11 vs top 25 teams the last 3 seasons. Thats after starting 5-7 the first two years. Pathetic.
-
It's interesting to contrast those who embrace change and understand that we could get a dud but you have to take the risk irregardless. Then you have the faction who says change will be disastrous and detrimental to recruiting and those who are already committed. We have had a decent number of 4 stars mixed with a few five stars, linemen who are falling out or not developing, and there's no need to rehash W/L and on field performance. I don't understand how that faction can't at least listen while their heads are crammed clean up their own asses.
-
It's 2007 all over again.loadsock said:It's interesting to contrast those who embrace change and understand that we could get a dud but you have to take the risk irregardless. Then you have the faction who says change will be disastrous and detrimental to recruiting and those who are already committed. We have had a decent number of 4 stars mixed with a few five stars, linemen who are falling out or not developing, and there's no need to rehash W/L and on field performance. I don't understand how that faction can't at least listen while their heads are crammed clean up their own asses.
Deathwatch 2014 is going to be special. -
Many teams get a big bounce just from firing the coach and it doesn't matter who comes in immediately. Look at us in 2009. Look at our defense last year. Look at USC now. Look at ND in Weiss' first year.loadsock said:It's interesting to contrast those who embrace change and understand that we could get a dud but you have to take the risk irregardless. Then you have the faction who says change will be disastrous and detrimental to recruiting and those who are already committed. We have had a decent number of 4 stars mixed with a few five stars, linemen who are falling out or not developing, and there's no need to rehash W/L and on field performance. I don't understand how that faction can't at least listen while their heads are crammed clean up their own asses.
Its clear that UW is underachieving under Sark and this year has been the worst in terms of underachievement. New blood will get this team to 9-10 wins next year regardless of who it is. This isn't going to be a Dykes situation. -
How did Baird escape being fired by DJ?Sarkingham said:But he can recruit!! What would we do if we lost him? He's doing it the right way...Huge and Baird say so.
-
Like you said in your firesark blog the 0-12 excuse didn't start coming up until 2011. I don't recall them bringing up 0-12 the first two years when that could have been used.HeretoBeatmyChest said:3-11 vs top 25 teams the last 3 seasons. Thats after starting 5-7 the first two years. Pathetic.
-
Fact: I gave a few hundred dollars to Wisconsin (my other alma mater) today and none to Washington. That is much more meaningful than any football related statistic I could dig up.
-
I prefer to look at so-called ranked opponents differently. To me, I don't give a shit if Boise State was ranked because of some preseason bullshit. Or put it this way: should ASU get extra credit for beating us because we were mistakenly ranked? By the end of the year the polls reflect who you actually are. With that in mind, I come up with:
2009 0-3
2010 1-3
2011 0-5
2012 2-3
2013 0-4 (BSU won't make the final poll but I think ASU will)
So I get 3-18. Breaking those numbers down further:
- 9 of those games were away. We have lost all 9 by an average of 25 points (47-22).
- 9 of those are home games. We have lost 7 of them. In total, the average score of those games is 17 (UW) -32 (Opponents).
- The 3 neutral games (all bowls) shows an amazing Don James-like trait. We are 1-2 but have been outscored by only 1 point total (102-101).
- Overall, we are outscored by 17 points in games against teams that end up ranked. The average score for us losing is 39-22.
-
If people can't grasp the concept of 0.500 I doubt lists of numbers are going to help. It's like trying to explain the difference between a violin and a fiddle to a horse that had been kicked int the head by another horse.
-
Blah, Blah, Blah, the facts are he's doing it the right way.DoogieMcDoogerson said:FACTS
Inability to Win on the Road
2009: 0-5 on the road
2010: 3-3 on the road
2011: 1-4 on the road
2012: 2-4 on the road
2013: 1-3 so far
Combined record: 7-19 on the road
Huge Blowout losses each year
2009 - 43-19 loss to Oregon
2009 - 48-21 loss to Oregon State
2010 - 56-21 loss to Nebraska
2010 - 44-14 loss to Arizona
2010 - 41-0 to Stanford
2010 - 53-16 loss to Oregon
2011 - 51-38 loss to Nebraska
2011 - 65-21 loss to Stanford
2011 - 40-17 loss to USC
2012 - 41-3 loss to LSU
2012 - 52-21 loss to Oregon
2012 - 52-17 loss to Arizona
2013 - 45-24 loss to Oregon
2013 - 53-24 loss to Arizona State
A 3 or more game losing streak in the pac-12 every year
2009 - 4 games ( ASU, Oregon, UCLA, Oregon State )
2010 - 3 games ( ASU, Stanford, Oregon )
2011 - 3 games ( Oregon, USC, Oregon State )
2012 - 3 games ( Oregon, USC, Arizona )
2013 - 3 games ( Stanford, Oregon, Arizona State )
Average and not improving pac-12 record every year
2009 - 4 wins, 5 losses
2010 - 5 wins, 4 losses
2011 - 5 wins, 4 losses
2012 - 5 wins, 4 losses
2013 - 3 wins, 4 losses so far
Record versus ranked opponents
2009 - 2-3
2010 - 3-4
2011 - 0-4
2012 - 2-4
2013 - 1-3
overall 8-18
Record versus the NW
1-2
2-1
1-2
1-2
0-1 so far
5-7 record overall
Record versus Oregon
0-5
Could we really do worse with a coaching change?
-
Can't blame you...looks like Wisconsin made a great hire in Gary Anderson while the Doogiest of Doogs are worried that if we drop the ugly chick we have, we'll end up with a heinous chick. I just can't understand that defeatist thinking...is that the philosophy of a winner? I wonder what this great human being would tell them if he was still alive
Mad_Son said:Fact: I gave a few hundred dollars to Wisconsin (my other alma mater) today and none to Washington. That is much more meaningful than any football related statistic I could dig up.
-
You need to post this on the Seattle Times comments to the Larry Stone article.WDWHA said:I prefer to look at so-called ranked opponents differently. To me, I don't give a shit if Boise State was ranked because of some preseason bullshit. Or put it this way: should ASU get extra credit for beating us because we were mistakenly ranked? By the end of the year the polls reflect who you actually are. With that in mind, I come up with:
2009 0-3
2010 1-3
2011 0-5
2012 2-3
2013 0-4 (BSU won't make the final poll but I think ASU will)
So I get 3-18. Breaking those numbers down further:
- 9 of those games were away. We have lost all 9 by an average of 25 points (47-22).
- 9 of those are home games. We have lost 7 of them. In total, the average score of those games is 17 (UW) -32 (Opponents).
- The 3 neutral games (all bowls) shows an amazing Don James-like trait. We are 1-2 but have been outscored by only 1 point total (102-101).
- Overall, we are outscored by 17 points in games against teams that end up ranked. The average score for us losing is 39-22.
![[Deleted User]](https://wb.vanillicon.com/b14605887e2b6b59902271a0095c9265_100.png)
