Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.

Larry Stone must lurk here

13

Comments

  • [Deleted User]
    [Deleted User] Posts: 11,453
    To those who advocate keeping Sark I always ask them(assuming they have jobs) in your field of work do you think your boss would put up with the same level of inconsistencies? Where you annually every year just take 3 weeks in a row off with piss poor performance.

    Where you are so up and down week to week they can't keep track and overall you are just an average worker?

    You wouldn't have even made it through one year let alone five years.

    So I don't get why Doogs feel sorry for Sark if he's fired. He's made a lot of money and will make millions for not coaching the next two years so that's also stupid.

    I agree with you guys on 0-12 needs to stop and to be fair like Chest pointed out Sark/Minions didn't really go to 0-12 his first two years.

    I first really started to notice 0-12 during his slide in after HOUSE MONEY! in 2011 then it was all over the place.

    When does 0-12 stop to these guys? So in 2020 if we suck ass are they going to continue to bring up one time we went 0-12 so we shouldn't bitch?!

    We are trying to prevent the next 0-12 by wanting Sark gone. In 2007 you kept hearing about how Rick left him a mess and the program did go 1-10 you know. With retaining Ty they went 0-12. Even though I'm a Huskies fan I say they as those fucks who wanted Ty got their wish.

    If you bring Sark back you will be risking what UW did in 2008/2003 while firing Rick you can do what UW did in 1998 when the warning signs were there for a coach with a much better resume than Sark/actual ties to the program but they chose to party ways.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Swaye
    Swaye Moderator, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 41,741 Founders Club
    edited November 2013
    This thread is full of win. The two letters to Larry are spot on. Great work 1%ers. 'Murica!
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Mad_Son
    Mad_Son Member Posts: 10,194
    supercanuck said:

    The sense of entitlement is strong in this thread.

    You clearly do not understand the difference between entitlement and trying to make a change for the better because you have standards. The idiot who expects to sit back with a loser head coach and get big wins from nothing is the entitled person.

    HTH
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • CFetters_Nacho_Lover
    CFetters_Nacho_Lover Moderator, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 32,876 Founders Club
    Brilliant response.
    He_Needs_More_Time said:

    To those who advocate keeping Sark I always ask them(assuming they have jobs) in your field of work do you think your boss would put up with the same level of inconsistencies? Where you annually every year just take 3 months weeks in a row off with piss poor performance.

    Where you are so up and down week to week they can't keep track and overall you are just an average worker?

    You wouldn't have even made it through one year let alone five years.

    So I don't get why Doogs feel sorry for Sark if he's fired. He's made a lot of money and will make millions for not coaching the next two years so that's also stupid.

    I agree with you guys on 0-12 needs to stop and to be fair like Chest pointed out Sark/Minions didn't really go to 0-12 his first two years.

    I first really started to notice 0-12 during his slide in after HOUSE MONEY! in 2011 then it was all over the place.

    When does 0-12 stop to these guys? So in 2020 if we suck ass are they going to continue to bring up one time we went 0-12 so we shouldn't bitch?!

    We are trying to prevent the next 0-12 by wanting Sark gone. In 2007 you kept hearing about how Rick left him a mess and the program did go 1-10 you know. With retaining Ty they went 0-12. Even though I'm a Huskies fan I say they as those fucks who wanted Ty got their wish.

    If you bring Sark back you will be risking what UW did in 2008/2003 while firing Rick you can do what UW did in 1998 when the warning signs were there for a coach with a much better resume than Sark/actual ties to the program but they chose to party ways.

    Fixed to accurately depict the analogy.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • MisterEm
    MisterEm Member Posts: 6,685
    The ROI on this investment plateaued in 2010.

    The trend data speaks for itself.

    Anyone with side businesses or investment properties etc. etc. understands this notion.

    Not making a decision is one itself. Just like sitting on a turd of a property that has peaked and/or loses equity.

    Take the emotion out of it, write off the loss and move on. A good business man (AD) knows they will make any loss back and then some on the next deal.



    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • [Deleted User]
    [Deleted User] Posts: 11,453
    CFetters_Nacho_Lover said:

    Brilliant response.

    He_Needs_More_Time said:

    To those who advocate keeping Sark I always ask them(assuming they have jobs) in your field of work do you think your boss would put up with the same level of inconsistencies? Where you annually every year just take 3 months weeks in a row off with piss poor performance.

    Where you are so up and down week to week they can't keep track and overall you are just an average worker?

    You wouldn't have even made it through one year let alone five years.

    So I don't get why Doogs feel sorry for Sark if he's fired. He's made a lot of money and will make millions for not coaching the next two years so that's also stupid.

    I agree with you guys on 0-12 needs to stop and to be fair like Chest pointed out Sark/Minions didn't really go to 0-12 his first two years.

    I first really started to notice 0-12 during his slide in after HOUSE MONEY! in 2011 then it was all over the place.

    When does 0-12 stop to these guys? So in 2020 if we suck ass are they going to continue to bring up one time we went 0-12 so we shouldn't bitch?!

    We are trying to prevent the next 0-12 by wanting Sark gone. In 2007 you kept hearing about how Rick left him a mess and the program did go 1-10 you know. With retaining Ty they went 0-12. Even though I'm a Huskies fan I say they as those fucks who wanted Ty got their wish.

    If you bring Sark back you will be risking what UW did in 2008/2003 while firing Rick you can do what UW did in 1998 when the warning signs were there for a coach with a much better resume than Sark/actual ties to the program but they chose to party ways.

    Fixed to accurately depict the analogy.
    I almost put 3 months instead of 3 weeks to depic the analogy but we've had a new batch of fucktards in here so I figured they wouldn't get it.

    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • HeretoBeatmyChest
    HeretoBeatmyChest Member Posts: 4,295
    MisterEm said:

    The ROI on this investment plateaued in 2010.

    The trend data speaks for itself.

    Anyone with side businesses or investment properties etc. etc. understands this notion.

    Not making a decision is one itself. Just like sitting on a turd of a property that has peaked and/or loses equity.

    Take the emotion out of it, write off the loss and move on. A good business man (AD) knows they will make any loss back and then some on the next deal.



    Excellent post.

    The investment in Sark to this point has earned a good return. You have top 25 talent. You have 4 straight bowls (assuming 1 more W). You have a new stadium. There is a good foundation here and Sark deserves some credit for that. However, if you keep Sark for next season then that return becomes smaller and smaller over time. Its clear that the return has peaked or hit its maximum.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter