Nothing will change. As a bench warmer in the SEC, I played very little, but I did see how winning teams are built. Cream Puff is not even close. Lack of preparedness, direction, attitude, toughness, player development and accountability. These are coaching problems. I hope I'm wrong, but I don't see things changing until a new head coach takes over. And after having a 12-1 season as BYU QB, and being a protege under Pete Carroll at USC, Sark knows absolutely nothing about how a winning team is built. He has never seen what a winning team looks like, has he? So I guess you must have some kind of privileged insider's perspective of the UW program and you see the daily ins and outs of the program that leads you to the conclusion that nothing will change and Sark is not even close to building a winning team?
Nothing will change. As a bench warmer in the SEC, I played very little, but I did see how winning teams are built. Cream Puff is not even close. Lack of preparedness, direction, attitude, toughness, player development and accountability. These are coaching problems. I hope I'm wrong, but I don't see things changing until a new head coach takes over.
Lack of preparedness, direction, attitude, toughness, player development and accountability. These are coaching problems. I hope I'm wrong, but I don't see things changing until a new head coach takes over.
Nothing will change. As a bench warmer in the SEC, I played very little, but I did see how winning teams are built. Cream Puff is not even close. Lack of preparedness, direction, attitude, toughness, player development and accountability. These are coaching problems. I hope I'm wrong, but I don't see things changing until a new head coach takes over. And after having a 12-1 season as BYU QB, and being a protege under Pete Carroll at USC, Sark knows absolutely nothing about how a winning team is built. He has never seen what a winning team looks like, has he? So I guess you must have some kind of privileged insider's perspective of the UW program and you see the daily ins and outs of the program that leads you to the conclusion that nothing will change and Sark is not even close to building a winning team? Have you been paying attention at all the last 4 years
7-6 rising over 7-6 rising over 7-6. Winners win. They aren't rising they fucking rose plateaued
So if they had been 9-4 last season like they should have been, then would you say the program is in good condition? A couple of stupid fluke losses away from being 9-4 and the program is hopeless? Yes those losses were an embarrassment and inexcusable mistakes. But that does not define where the program is currently at. The program rose to respectability the last 4 years, and now with the new Husky Stadium and facilities upgrades, we can finally "take the next step" (I know you all love that quote from last season haha) to elite status.We fell behind in the facilities race for far too long. Not even Nick Saban could win the Pac 12 with a piece of shit stadium with a fucking track around the field, and a decade of miserable losing seasons.
So if they had been 9-4 last season like they should have been, then would you say the program is in good condition? A couple of stupid fluke losses away from being 9-4 and the program is hopeless? Yes those losses were an embarrassment and inexcusable mistakes. But that does not define where the program is currently at. The program rose to respectability the last 4 years, and now with the new Husky Stadium and facilities upgrades, we can finally "take the next step" (I know you all love that quote from last season haha) to elite status.We fell behind in the facilities race for far too long. Not even Nick Saban could win the Pac 12 with a piece of shit stadium with a fucking track around the field, and a decade of miserable losing seasons. If you're going to count losses as wins, then let's be fair to Stanford and Oregon State. They are looking at their games with us last year as "stupid fluke losses", due primarily to horrible QB play from their starters. It can be argued that under normal circumstances, OSU and Stanford beat us easily last year.But we beat them, so we count those as victories, don't we? You can't give a team credit for winning games they didn't win.
And I don't know if we would have beat Stanford with Hogan or not. To me that is irrelevant. We beat them with the QB that they chose to start. And Mannion for OSU was their starter the year before when we lost to them if I'm not mistaken.Would we have lost to WSU and BSU if we had our full starting O Line? Who knows? But it doesn't matter because we lost.
Mike, I see what you are saying about the overall patterns. There have been some disturbing patterns in the Sark era. I would say the most obvious one being the porous defense, which he addressed by remaking the D staff. And the entire program from Sark on down has acknowledged the fact that hurry up spread offenses have killed us, and they are focusing a great amount of effort into addressing that. As far as the silly statements like "playing with house money" and other in game coaching mistakes, I would attribute that to being a young, inexperienced coach. He is still evolving and growing as a coach. I think 98% of the time, Sark has the right mentality, and says the right thing.Sark has already shown his ability to run a potent offense. I think the 2012 offense was an aberration because of all the O line injuries. The 2013 offense will return to a high level with 5th year senior Keith Price having a season more like 2011.Yes, Sark and his team have been average "golfers" so far, I like your metaphor btw. But if you are an average golfer that has the ability to hit the great shots, all you have to do is cut out the bad shots, and you will become good. As opposed to an average golfer who doesn't have the ability to hit great shots ever, he is just average and will always be average. I think Sark and this team fall into the first category.
We've been whooooshed