9-4
Even if they beat Puke/Md, NCS Wolves in the Sun Bowel or Naval in the processed cheese cures hunger bowl, they'll probably be ranked around 20th. I could be wrong, but that should sustain recruiting.
Next year, a trained monkey could almost coach the team to 8-6 or 9-5. I think Sark might be able to get to 10-4. 11-3 is probably a pipe dream, but weirder things have transpired.
There are cheap and stupid NFL (and college) teams out there. 10-4 will probably give Steve some interviews at least. He seems like the kind of enthusiastic, slick f*** who can fool people (especially people with limited budgets) in interviews, while other, less personable yet more qualified candidates getting ignored or don't make it to the second interview. I think this is the best chance we have of getting rid of the guy, other than going six and seven after losing to some worthless MAC squad. Personally I don't do the whole root for your team to lose coach gets fired/ they get a good pick.
As discussed preseason, 8-5 and maybe 7-6 are probably the worst case scenarios.
Comments
-
Ok.
Can you pour gasoline on me? -
there's a better chance of pp_fs passing the WASL than there is of UW finishing 9-4
-
Still, Fetters has the o/u for next year regular season at 9-4. That is 5 conference wins and a projection of treading water. The spin machine is working overtime to reduce expectations so the Sarkanian Nightmare can have a job for just forever. Dying in a fire seems too painful so I just will crank up the cholesterol.
-
Sark said we went 9-4 last year. He said UW was finally in position to challenge for a PAC-12 North title THIS year.
-
You lose your starting QB, RB, and all-alcoholics-anonymous TE next year. I'm sure Sark will have Miley Cyrus ready to go.
-
I would easily take 6-7 with Sark gone then 9-4 and he stays.
-
If Sankey leaves early, is Sark going to bad mouth him too?
-
If the intern couldn't squeeze more than 7 wins out of Locker/Polk or Price/Sankey, it ain't gonna happen with whoever/whoever. HTH.
-
I have a really bad feeling this team is going to go 8-5 and have the worst possible season imaginable which was my fear heading into the year.
-
TSWO when Cozzetto wasn't named the intern head coach for the Vegas bowl.He_Needs_More_Time said:I have a really bad feeling this team is going to go 8-5 and have the worst possible season imaginable which was my fear heading into the year.
Sark should have sat his fat ass next to Ricky at the P12 networks all season.
-
I don't see it.
How will we get to those 5 conference wins?
I realize that the home/away schedule is better for us next year, but...
We will be a worse team.
UCLA will be better
ASU will be better
WSU will be better
Arizona will be better
Even Cal and Col will be better (can they be worse?)
The only teams that may slide are OSU, OU, and Stanford..
Who are we actually going to beat? The 5 wins per year mediocrity is bad enough, but the rest of the P12 is passing us by.
We hoard our 5 wins under the mattress like misers while the rest of the P12 is getting interest. -
9-4 with not 1 meaningful win is awful. The meaningful wins (Stanford, Oregon, UCLA, ASU) have all passed. I highly doubt Sark goes 9-4 but if he does he will have done so by beating up a bunch of Puppylove_Sugarsteels.
-
Besides losing all that fluff, what Sark needs is to embrace The Oregon Way and get the ducks and other BCS pretenders the fuck off his schedule. As Sark has demonstrated in 2013, a coach can have one too many hurry-up no-huddle gimmicks.AZDuck said:You lose your starting QB, RB, and all-alcoholics-anonymous TE next year. I'm sure Sark will have Miley Cyrus ready to go.
-
If Sark goes 7-6 this year it will be 4 years of incremental regression. The Holiday Bowl team was arguably his best overall. Keith's Sophomore year he at least got a win on the road at USC. Last year he at least beat Stanford, yes that win was fucktarded but he still beat the team that won the Rose Bowl.
This year? He hasn't done anything! His best win is a home game (shocker I know) to a bad BSU team. Beating an Oregon State team that mirrors us, WSU at home, or Toledo Tech A&M in a bowl game doesn't mean anything.
Didn't the doogs themselves called the most talented team in the Sark era? I disagree with this by the way but it is always fun to use doog arguments against them. His first team had FOUR NFL starters on defense yet he had to bring his terrible frat buddy to come coach. His 2010 team had 8 guys who are on an NFL roster and that is my pick for his most talented team. -
The hole created by 0-12 is frightening. Turns out that every year we measure it, it gets deeper.
-
Jack Lockner was the starting QB for both wins against USC.CuntWaffle said:If Sark goes 7-6 this year it will be 4 years of incremental regression. The Holiday Bowl team was arguably his best overall. Keith's Sophomore year he at least got a win on the road at USC. Last year he at least beat Stanford, yes that win was fucktarded but he still beat the team that won the Rose Bowl.
This year? He hasn't done anything! His best win is a home game (shocker I know) to a bad BSU team. Beating an Oregon State team that mirrors us, WSU at home, or Toledo Tech A&M in a bowl game doesn't mean anything.
Didn't the doogs themselves called the most talented team in the Sark era? I disagree with this by the way but it is always fun to use doog arguments against them. His first team had FOUR NFL starters on defense yet he had to bring his terrible frat buddy to come coach. His 2010 team had 8 guys who are on an NFL roster and that is my pick for his most talented team. -
Yea that was my mistake. All this mediocre football blends together so it is hard to remember.CFetters_Nacho_Lover said:
Jack Lockner was the starting QB for both wins against USC.CuntWaffle said:If Sark goes 7-6 this year it will be 4 years of incremental regression. The Holiday Bowl team was arguably his best overall. Keith's Sophomore year he at least got a win on the road at USC. Last year he at least beat Stanford, yes that win was fucktarded but he still beat the team that won the Rose Bowl.
This year? He hasn't done anything! His best win is a home game (shocker I know) to a bad BSU team. Beating an Oregon State team that mirrors us, WSU at home, or Toledo Tech A&M in a bowl game doesn't mean anything.
Didn't the doogs themselves called the most talented team in the Sark era? I disagree with this by the way but it is always fun to use doog arguments against them. His first team had FOUR NFL starters on defense yet he had to bring his terrible frat buddy to come coach. His 2010 team had 8 guys who are on an NFL roster and that is my pick for his most talented team.
-
Keith Price as a redshirt freshman did throw a critical touchdown pass in that win over USC back in 2010. That would be Sark's last significant road win over an 8-5 USC team led by Lame Kitten.
-
9-4 is an EPIC failure with this schedule. I REALLY lost interest after the Stanford game because unlike most I do not believe Stanford w/Hogan is that good and I always had that as a must win game on the schedule.
Even if we win 9, we will not have beaten a good team and our road woes continue. While a lot of the Dawg community will site progress, in reality it will be a +2 in win totals from Yr 2 with a shit bowl trophy in the case. -
If oregon's offense is a gimmick, sign me up. It's no more of a gimmick than running the 46 defense.Tailgater said:
Besides losing all that fluff, what Sark needs is to embrace The Oregon Way and get the ducks and other BCS pretenders the fuck off his schedule. As Sark has demonstrated in 2013, a coach can have one too many hurry-up no-huddle gimmicks.AZDuck said:You lose your starting QB, RB, and all-alcoholics-anonymous TE next year. I'm sure Sark will have Miley Cyrus ready to go.
-
Oregon's offense isn't a gimmick per se but the hurry-up aspect of it kind of is because teams are growing accustomed to it, especially the teams with great DCs and front 7 depth (like the Stanford sharks dragging the flailing ducks to deep water).
As for the 46 defense, I love the general principles of it and would be very curious to see the some of the principles redeployed with a 3-3-5 defense against spread option teams.AtomicDawg said:
If oregon's offense is a gimmick, sign me up. It's no more of a gimmick than running the 46 defense.Tailgater said:
Besides losing all that fluff, what Sark needs is to embrace The Oregon Way and get the ducks and other BCS pretenders the fuck off his schedule. As Sark has demonstrated in 2013, a coach can have one too many hurry-up no-huddle gimmicks.AZDuck said:You lose your starting QB, RB, and all-alcoholics-anonymous TE next year. I'm sure Sark will have Miley Cyrus ready to go.
-
I loved the 46 defense too but eventually teams gashed it by running up the gut and short passing games.
It's Ruth logic when you bring out the gimmick card. Their conference record ever since Kelly was the oc there tells the story. -
If Oregon's offense is a gimmick, so is 75% of college football's.
![[Deleted User]](https://wf.vanillicon.com/f554f53c1ce0fe601afe4046f290767c_100.png)
![[Deleted User]](https://wb.vanillicon.com/b14605887e2b6b59902271a0095c9265_100.png)
