So I woke up this morning

One thing to keep in mind, look at our? NY6 draws. Alebama, Penn with Saquon, and Ohio State. It’s not like we? lucked into a matchup against Notre Dame, Miami, UCF or Michigan even. Those are games that with our? talent we should lose. Auburn was a clusterfuck, and a game we? should have won without needing any luck.

Don't be so negative. At least your C-PAP machine is working.

A

creepycoug said:

ApostleofGrief said:

we?

Yup. I've been around a lot longer than you have Tonto. You'd do well to remember that.

I was there! when we were shit-talking before the 2000 UW/Miami game. While you were still dating cheerleaders.

I had a 2 tent full tended brunch bar in the East fucking end zone for that game.

Pump my scotch, cane!!

dawgs206 said:

Petersen is David Shaw until proven otherwise. A stubborn, offensive-minded coach that runs his system to a fault. The difference is Shaw has won the big game (though his Rose Bowls were against Iowa and Wisconsin) and we haven't (Bama, Penn State, OSU).

Both teams will be in contention to win the North every year, but sometimes the results leave a lot to be desired.

Shaw benefitted from inheriting a good team and Andrew Luck, but he was able to beat Oregon when they were on top and get 2 Rose Bowl W's. Petersen benefitted from a shit conference and winning against teams we? should beat, but shitting the bed in the big games.

To date, Shaw>Petersen

PurpleThrobber said:

dawgs206 said:

Petersen is David Shaw until proven otherwise. A stubborn, offensive-minded coach that runs his system to a fault. The difference is Shaw has won the big game (though his Rose Bowls were against Iowa and Wisconsin) and we haven't (Bama, Penn State, OSU).

Both teams will be in contention to win the North every year, but sometimes the results leave a lot to be desired.

Shaw benefitted from inheriting a good team and Andrew Luck, but he was able to beat Oregon when they were on top and get 2 Rose Bowl W's. Petersen benefitted from a shit conference and winning against teams we? should beat, but shitting the bed in the big games.

So if Sumlin is Black Sark, does that make Peterman White Shaw or is Shaw Black Peterman?

whynotboth.gif

Speaking of sumlin, he has become a complete nobody. I never hear anything about him.

creepycoug said:

bigcc said:

CaptainPJ said:

Houhusky said:

Elite coaches should be able to get atleast one upset/surprise/big win in 5 years, even if they luck into it. even with slightly deficient talent

UW will never have the institutional culture, structure or support that the schools in the South have created. NEVER.
.

Lou Holtz was brilliant at ND in this perspective.

Second point, is almost a non-starter. The loser mentality of Seattle will always lower the ceiling, especially with the “progressives” on campus, which is an additional battle any UW Coach has to battle, while others are spending their energy reloading.

How exactly is Petersen battling campus progressives?

@MikeDamone addressed this the other day: there is no "war" to fight with campus progressives. All teams in the Pac 12 not named Stanford are recruiting the same kids, even Cal. Other than that weird PE thing that Washington has (which as I recall is an issue with JC xfers), we? access the same kids regardless of academis. They have to meet minimums.

I heard a UW assistant coach or player giving an interview where he was trying to make it sound like Washington had the same handicap that Stanford deals with. They do not.

So if USC, which as a school is harder to get into than Washington, can pull in the talent necessary to win big, then there is no institutional barrier preventing from Washington doing so. They? just need to close the deal.

What other support do you mean? Washington has never had more money than it does today, it has a new and beautiful stadium, it's in a city that is much more well known than it has been historically, it has good enuff facilities ... what are we talking about here? If you mean we? don't have alumni lurking around paying D tackle recruits $100k to sign, well, sure, that's true, and Bama does. I don't know what to tell you about that.

UW has the alumni but those uber rich fuckers DGAF about football

RaceBannon said:

creepycoug said:

bigcc said:

CaptainPJ said:

Houhusky said:

Elite coaches should be able to get atleast one upset/surprise/big win in 5 years, even if they luck into it. even with slightly deficient talent

UW will never have the institutional culture, structure or support that the schools in the South have created. NEVER.
.

Lou Holtz was brilliant at ND in this perspective.

Second point, is almost a non-starter. The loser mentality of Seattle will always lower the ceiling, especially with the “progressives” on campus, which is an additional battle any UW Coach has to battle, while others are spending their energy reloading.

How exactly is Petersen battling campus progressives?

@MikeDamone addressed this the other day: there is no "war" to fight with campus progressives. All teams in the Pac 12 not named Stanford are recruiting the same kids, even Cal. Other than that weird PE thing that Washington has (which as I recall is an issue with JC xfers), we? access the same kids regardless of academis. They have to meet minimums.

I heard a UW assistant coach or player giving an interview where he was trying to make it sound like Washington had the same handicap that Stanford deals with. They do not.

So if USC, which as a school is harder to get into than Washington, can pull in the talent necessary to win big, then there is no institutional barrier preventing from Washington doing so. They? just need to close the deal.

What other support do you mean? Washington has never had more money than it does today, it has a new and beautiful stadium, it's in a city that is much more well known than it has been historically, it has good enuff facilities ... what are we talking about here? If you mean we? don't have alumni lurking around paying D tackle recruits $100k to sign, well, sure, that's true, and Bama does. I don't know what to tell you about that.

UW has always been embarrassed by the thought of being a football factory or school

That lays on the head of the coach. Its why Petersen got hired. They still go with the we win the right way bullshit. James was a threat to the president

This is NOT unique to UW but is different from say the SEC

I contend that the recent misfortune at Oregon is for the same reason. Getting secret probation for Chip buying players caused the Admin to pull back the reigns

UW has been behind Oregon since the 90's in marketing, facilities and recruiting

Pretty good is good enough. ND fired Ty after three years, UW gave him 4 to get Owen12

Bottom line and thanks for hopping on is that UW can't buy players without the risk of their own dropping a dime on them.

Chintresting. I don't disagree, but when I? was there we? were pretty ok as a group having a kick ass team, even though it required more babysitting, and believe me, it did. I know Gerbs was an egghead, but when Miami was Miami damn it! their president, Tad Foote III (can you say fucking Yankee?) was the biggest academis, egg head, snobby, anti-football admin fuck lip you'd ever want to encounter. He and Jimmy fucking hated each other.

There has been a bunch of shit in the Miami Herald last few days as you'd guess, and in the middle of one of the articles, there was this comment from an alleged "insider", who was complaining a little that Miami struggles now to get some recruits because they are competing with programs who will just fucking pay. I guess I'm a naive dumbfuck, but I thought that kind of flagrant "bag man flirting with the death penalty" shit was exceedingly rare, and that it didn't really explain the SEC! SEC! SEC! It sounds like maybe that's a thing. Diaz won't touch that comment, of course, and just says there's plenty of talent in Dade, Broward and Palm Beach counties and that the real issue is that the culture needs to change, which is itself very true.

But I'm painfully aware of a lot of great talent that has leaked out of Florida to the SEC! SEC! SEC! in the last 5 to 10. Some big names, too, who were originally Miami guys until suddenly they weren't. Bama and LSU have been the biggest culprits, Georgia is now right up there too. Arkansas has stolen a few. Florida has always fed programs outside of the state. Used to be Ohio State (still is), Michigan, ND and that group. But the SEC really hits it hard now. Some of Bama's and LSU's marquee names of the last decade have been kids who were Hurricanes and then weren't. I attributed it to winning vs. not winning, but perhaps there is more going on. Everybody and their brother knows Auburn bought a national championship with Cam given the history and facts surrounding him and dad's bullshit church.

RaceBannon said:

http://twitter.com/CoachPeteUW/status/1083457518485950465

I can remember when Oregon State owned that stat.

UW_Doog_Bot said:

RaceBannon said:

creepycoug said:

bigcc said:

CaptainPJ said:

Houhusky said:

Elite coaches should be able to get atleast one upset/surprise/big win in 5 years, even if they luck into it. even with slightly deficient talent

UW will never have the institutional culture, structure or support that the schools in the South have created. NEVER.
.

Lou Holtz was brilliant at ND in this perspective.

Second point, is almost a non-starter. The loser mentality of Seattle will always lower the ceiling, especially with the “progressives” on campus, which is an additional battle any UW Coach has to battle, while others are spending their energy reloading.

How exactly is Petersen battling campus progressives?

@MikeDamone addressed this the other day: there is no "war" to fight with campus progressives. All teams in the Pac 12 not named Stanford are recruiting the same kids, even Cal. Other than that weird PE thing that Washington has (which as I recall is an issue with JC xfers), we? access the same kids regardless of academis. They have to meet minimums.

I heard a UW assistant coach or player giving an interview where he was trying to make it sound like Washington had the same handicap that Stanford deals with. They do not.

So if USC, which as a school is harder to get into than Washington, can pull in the talent necessary to win big, then there is no institutional barrier preventing from Washington doing so. They? just need to close the deal.

What other support do you mean? Washington has never had more money than it does today, it has a new and beautiful stadium, it's in a city that is much more well known than it has been historically, it has good enuff facilities ... what are we talking about here? If you mean we? don't have alumni lurking around paying D tackle recruits $100k to sign, well, sure, that's true, and Bama does. I don't know what to tell you about that.

UW has always been embarrassed by the thought of being a football factory or school

That lays on the head of the coach. Its why Petersen got hired. They still go with the we win the right way bullshit. James was a threat to the president

This is NOT unique to UW but is different from say the SEC

I contend that the recent misfortune at Oregon is for the same reason. Getting secret probation for Chip buying players caused the Admin to pull back the reigns

UW has been behind Oregon since the 90's in marketing, facilities and recruiting

Pretty good is good enough. ND fired Ty after three years, UW gave him 4 to get Owen12

Bottom line and thanks for hopping on is that UW can't buy players without the risk of their own dropping a dime on them.

Never forget that Suzzallo got rid of Gil Dobie(who went on to win multiple championships for another school) for the same reasons uppercampus got rid of James. We might be BAMA! if it wasn't for uppercampus never being okay with their brand being sullied by the likes of football.

The problem I have with this is that there is no better public university than Michigan, and they've always seemed to be ok with their rep as a football powerhouse. Cal just DGAF, but if they could stumble into being good, I wonder whether the admins would try and blow it up. It's not like a good football program is going to suddenly unwind all of the amazing research and shit that has happened at Berkeley. That part of their rep. is permanent. They fucking invented chemistry on that campus. Even a dodo like Lynch driving around on his cart won't change that.

Pitchfork51 said:

creepycoug said:

UW_Doog_Bot said:

RaceBannon said:

creepycoug said:

bigcc said:

CaptainPJ said:

Houhusky said:

Elite coaches should be able to get atleast one upset/surprise/big win in 5 years, even if they luck into it. even with slightly deficient talent

UW will never have the institutional culture, structure or support that the schools in the South have created. NEVER.
.

Lou Holtz was brilliant at ND in this perspective.

Second point, is almost a non-starter. The loser mentality of Seattle will always lower the ceiling, especially with the “progressives” on campus, which is an additional battle any UW Coach has to battle, while others are spending their energy reloading.

How exactly is Petersen battling campus progressives?

@MikeDamone addressed this the other day: there is no "war" to fight with campus progressives. All teams in the Pac 12 not named Stanford are recruiting the same kids, even Cal. Other than that weird PE thing that Washington has (which as I recall is an issue with JC xfers), we? access the same kids regardless of academis. They have to meet minimums.

I heard a UW assistant coach or player giving an interview where he was trying to make it sound like Washington had the same handicap that Stanford deals with. They do not.

So if USC, which as a school is harder to get into than Washington, can pull in the talent necessary to win big, then there is no institutional barrier preventing from Washington doing so. They? just need to close the deal.

What other support do you mean? Washington has never had more money than it does today, it has a new and beautiful stadium, it's in a city that is much more well known than it has been historically, it has good enuff facilities ... what are we talking about here? If you mean we? don't have alumni lurking around paying D tackle recruits $100k to sign, well, sure, that's true, and Bama does. I don't know what to tell you about that.

UW has always been embarrassed by the thought of being a football factory or school

That lays on the head of the coach. Its why Petersen got hired. They still go with the we win the right way bullshit. James was a threat to the president

This is NOT unique to UW but is different from say the SEC

I contend that the recent misfortune at Oregon is for the same reason. Getting secret probation for Chip buying players caused the Admin to pull back the reigns

UW has been behind Oregon since the 90's in marketing, facilities and recruiting

Pretty good is good enough. ND fired Ty after three years, UW gave him 4 to get Owen12

Bottom line and thanks for hopping on is that UW can't buy players without the risk of their own dropping a dime on them.

Never forget that Suzzallo got rid of Gil Dobie(who went on to win multiple championships for another school) for the same reasons uppercampus got rid of James. We might be BAMA! if it wasn't for uppercampus never being okay with their brand being sullied by the likes of football.

The problem I have with this is that there is no better public university than Michigan, and they've always seemed to be ok with their rep as a football powerhouse. Cal just DGAF, but if they could stumble into being good, I wonder whether the admins would try and blow it up. It's not like a good football program is going to suddenly unwind all of the amazing research and shit that has happened at Berkeley. That part of their rep. is permanent. They fucking invented chemistry on that campus. Even a dodo like Lynch driving around on his cart won't change that.

Nerds on the west coast hate athletes and are jealous of them. Midwest people generally embrace physical achievement a bit more.
Simple fact.




Case closed.

Like a West Coast Bias?

Doog_de_Jour said:

UW_Doog_Bot said:

RaceBannon said:

creepycoug said:

bigcc said:

CaptainPJ said:

Houhusky said:

Elite coaches should be able to get atleast one upset/surprise/big win in 5 years, even if they luck into it. even with slightly deficient talent

UW will never have the institutional culture, structure or support that the schools in the South have created. NEVER.
.

Lou Holtz was brilliant at ND in this perspective.

Second point, is almost a non-starter. The loser mentality of Seattle will always lower the ceiling, especially with the “progressives” on campus, which is an additional battle any UW Coach has to battle, while others are spending their energy reloading.

How exactly is Petersen battling campus progressives?

@MikeDamone addressed this the other day: there is no "war" to fight with campus progressives. All teams in the Pac 12 not named Stanford are recruiting the same kids, even Cal. Other than that weird PE thing that Washington has (which as I recall is an issue with JC xfers), we? access the same kids regardless of academis. They have to meet minimums.

I heard a UW assistant coach or player giving an interview where he was trying to make it sound like Washington had the same handicap that Stanford deals with. They do not.

So if USC, which as a school is harder to get into than Washington, can pull in the talent necessary to win big, then there is no institutional barrier preventing from Washington doing so. They? just need to close the deal.

What other support do you mean? Washington has never had more money than it does today, it has a new and beautiful stadium, it's in a city that is much more well known than it has been historically, it has good enuff facilities ... what are we talking about here? If you mean we? don't have alumni lurking around paying D tackle recruits $100k to sign, well, sure, that's true, and Bama does. I don't know what to tell you about that.

UW has always been embarrassed by the thought of being a football factory or school

That lays on the head of the coach. Its why Petersen got hired. They still go with the we win the right way bullshit. James was a threat to the president

This is NOT unique to UW but is different from say the SEC

I contend that the recent misfortune at Oregon is for the same reason. Getting secret probation for Chip buying players caused the Admin to pull back the reigns

UW has been behind Oregon since the 90's in marketing, facilities and recruiting

Pretty good is good enough. ND fired Ty after three years, UW gave him 4 to get Owen12

Bottom line and thanks for hopping on is that UW can't buy players without the risk of their own dropping a dime on them.

Never forget that Suzzallo got rid of Gil Dobie(who went on to win multiple championships for another school) for the same reasons uppercampus got rid of James. We might be BAMA! if it wasn't for uppercampus never being okay with their brand being sullied by the likes of football.

That’s one of the things I’ve never understood about UW...they seem hell bent on being thought of first and foremost as an academic powerhouse and sneer at athletics (with the exception of @YellowSnow’s beloved rowboat...but that’s only because it gets us hobnobbing with the Ivies). Guess what kids, we aren’t going to be thought of in the same breath as Stanford, etc. so embrace sportsball a little bit more. Lots of schools have shown you can have ABUNDANCE by having strong football/basketball programs *and* research/academic programs.

Fuck UW admissions