Status of the program

[WizardHawk]

So after the ASU game everyone was pissed as can be and some were calling for Sark's head. Even after the UCLA loss with all of the penalties there was dissension in the ranks.

Now in the last two games UW totally and completely blew up a 6-6 beaver team at home and got out with a nice double digit win against their cross state rivals who were also 6-6 at home.

They ended the regular season 8-4 which was exactly what I predicted going into the season (as did quite a few of you as well although we probably predicted a few different games in there maybe). They have a chance to end the year 9-4 if they win in their bowl game.

How satisfied are you with the progress this year overall?

 

[WizardHawk]

Honestly I know how frustrated many of our clan are and I agree this program is nowhere near where it should be given all of the advantages we have over most of our conference and the northwest in general.

I do think we are tracking up and as long as the recruiting classes are staying top 20 I would see no reason to go in a new direction unless this team started slipping back in the sub .500 range again.

Part of the reason UW has slid so far is the coaching changes and constant instability of the program.

Next year they will have a lot of seniors/juniors starting. More than they have had in a very long time. They will also have a new QB and probably a new RB to lean on so who knows what growing pains they will have, but this coaching staff will have pieces to work with to prove they are still on the uptick.

I will say this, Sark doesn't have a long leash. He still has to win no less than 7 in any season, continue to have very high recruiting classes, and show us he is developing the offense and getting better at calling games and improving discipline each year or I'll be first in line to call for a change.

We simply cannot, and will not ever let this program slide all the way to the depths of the Willingham era and that demands we rise and be heard long before it gets there again.

 

[TheDayMan]

I voted "stagnant." I don't think this was a successful year, and even with one more win I don't think it's really an improvement or step forward. It's not really getting an extra win I'm too concerned with at this point. There isn't much difference between 7 or 8 wins, it will get you somewhere between the Fight Hunger Bowl and Alamo Bowl as we've seen.

I would have been a little happier and felt like this was an improvement if not for the blowouts (I'm calling the UCLA game a blowout even if the score didn't show it, at no point did I feel like we were really in that game). This program needs to be better than that.

I don't feel like I have been one ever calling for Sark's Job. I'm kind of indifferent. I don't think I'd be too upset to see him go but it's probably not best for the program right now.

We'll see how it goes, I'm excited for a fresh start at the quarterback position. Sark went all in with Price, as I suppose he should have with his starting QB, but I personally would have liked to see some competition for the spot last spring, or see Miles come in at times (like the WSU game).

Sark will and should get some more time to get the team to the next level, and I realize it takes time to build depth with a program that had none, but there is going to have to be a point that strong recruiting classes work against any argument for Sark. What good does pointing out top 25 recruiting classes do if you're not fielding a top 25 team?

 

[mcnabb7542]

I'm gonna go stagnant....

34-29 in five seasons. two bowl losses out of three bowls. 3 seasons at 7-6, then all this talk about great recruiting classes raises the question, where is the more "W's" with all these great recruiting classes? I don't want to hear that it takes time for these kids to get there feet wet cause we see alot of other freshmen or sophomores making contributions to their teams. Why hasn't it happen here?

I've said it when he got here and will continue to say that the "cupboard was bare" when he took over this program. But to me that's not an excuse any more, this offense should have been the backbone of this team, senior QB, stud tailback, a potential 1st round TE, and stable of wide outs. But saying all that, and looking at the loses, it was this offense that failed in those losses, it wasn't the defense. They couldn't finish against Stanford, (the ball was in there hands the last drive of that game) They couldn't respond when Oregon scored, ( and please this offense could move the ball against Oregons defense) ASU, they didn't even get off the plane, UCLA, again the ball was in there hands multiple times and they couldn't finish, ( I don't give a damn about the "phantom calls") just another excuse.

The lack of mental mistakes with penalties, sure a young roster, but come on HS teams have a lot more discipline then this team. Maybe that mind set is some of these great recruits that is talked about and these kids are in it for just themselves instead of really caring for the program?

That's what I see and thinking, sure I'm just one fan with one opinion, am I being to harsh on this staff? I don't think so since they play in one of the toughest conference in college football, if your not making "bigger" strides the next season you will end up in the bottom of this conference, and that's not good, since the whole game has change, and the thought process of how programs are built quickier, faster, and looking for the bigger bowl games, not some game in San Francisco meaning nothing....

 

[WizardHawk]

You know we don't always see eye to eye mcnabb, but I respect everyone's opinions and hope they all feel free to share them.

In some ways Sark is the victim of his own early success. To go from 0-12 to 5-7 and then 7-5 in 3 seasons has to be unprecedented. He took someone else's kids that pretty much sucked as bad as you can and won with them very fast. To me that begs the question of just how bad are the coaches at Colorado and Cal? But I digress. Sark hit the middle of the road with less than quality players.

So why is the program stuck at the same wins with all of the great recruiting classes? Well recruiting doesn't equal increased W's, but it sure puts you in better position to get there. In my opinion the defense kept them from having any chance of reaching 10 wins under Holt and Sark stayed with him at least a full season too long. That's fully Sark's fault and responsilibility. Last year they had injuries that were simply too much to overcome with such a young team that lacked anything that resembled depth and were in their first season under a new defense.

This year we expected more as we added depth, a senior QB, and had one of the top RB's in the nation. What happened though is Price took steps forward, but also took parts of games off at times and didn't play up to expectations in every game. He will tell you that himself. They also showed how much behind both of their lines are compared to Oregon and ASU specifically. I would say we also saw some growing pains in the brand new offense and Sark's play calling in it. Combine that with all of the stupid penalties and we had plenty to be frustrated with.

Sure, all of that sounds like 'excuses'. They are facts and aren't subject to debate, but when will we see results instead of reasons for the lack there of right?

I said going into this year that I expected 8 wins and possibly 9 if things went well. i expected to see a much better team, but that schedule was brutal in my opinion. There are two ways to look at the schedule and what you would prefer based on your goals: Want your toughest games on the road, or at home. When your toughest games are on the road you fully expect to lose those, but improve your odds of winning those closely matched ones at home. This makes for a schedule where 10 wins might be easier to reach with the teams you weren't going to beat anyway being on the road. The other way is really for those looking to reach 12 wins and you want those toughest games at home where you have less chance for slipping and expect your team to hold up on the road games in close ones. Where this team is at now we would do better with the hard ones on the road. Put Oregon on the road and maybe UCLA at home and would we have had 9 wins? How about a swap between Colorado on the road and Stanford at home? 10 maybe? We didn't have a schedule that was setup for a double digit win with a team that had only a few senior starters and was breaking in a brand new offense.

SARK: I think he showed some mistakes over the season with play calling and managing his team in the hurry up. Why wouldn't he considering he hasn't ever ran it at any level? I do think he has made improvement on it and I think that's all we can ask. At least he is willing to adapt to the changing game is being proactive in using what he sees as the very best schemes to get to the top of the conference. Jury is out on if it will end up making us into champions again.

The biggest problem I have with him this year is the penalties. They had too many in the Stanford game and it cost them the win. We can point to ASJ's drop, Price's low throw late, or the kicker with a bad back, but even with all of those had they just had a couple of less penalties they win that game. What would the UCLA game have been like without the stupid self inflicted penalties that just killed them? That is coaching and it has been a problem over his entire tenure here. I will not view him as a coach for the future of our program until he can get that one big glaring problem worked out.

I don't blame him for Price's inconsistency as he was still the best option this team had in every game he played. I know you don't agree and others may not as well, but that's how I see it.

So to answer the question about when does recruiting start to take hold I'd say it already has and will continue to do so, but this program needs more stability and we need to finish his full cycles before we judge whether or not they can reach the 10+ regular season win totals with any regularity like we all believe we should. Price was recruited in his first class and there hasn't been a stud guy behind him ready to go until this year. Ask Tedford how important having a quality veteran QB is to the success or failure of a program. Let's see what a senior class consisting of a 23rd rated class does over the crumbs left off a 64th rated class and see if it isn't better. Let's see what the depth behind them looks like when those are even higher ranked. Let's see what this team can do over the next couple of years with 5th year seniors all around the starting ranks and more importantly, going more than a full year with the same offense, same defense, and same staff in place to teach it.

Those are the reasons I'm not ready to give up on Sark. He does need to do something about the penalties or I won't ever view his teams as potential national championship quality. I do think even with those penalties he can reach CCG winning status if he keeps recruiting well.

 

[seahawksfan234]

For me I have to go somewhere between stagnant and somewhat happy.

I say that because I cannot ignore that the program is looking at a possible 2 win improvement over last year.

Despite the poor performance against ASU, Oregon and early on against UCLA the program does seem to be improving IMO. I believe that the new offense is a step in the right direction and the Huskies will return a lot of starters going into next season. I also believe that Cyler Miles can step right in and immediately be better than Keith Price, or at least I won't have to watch Keith Price smiling after he throws an INT.

Although I still say keep Sark on a short leash. This statement is contradictory to what I said above but unless we see steady improvement next season I think Sark's position needs to be re-evaluated. We have seen steady improvement so far but I still question his ability to lead a top 10 team, which is what this school expects.

The Huskies have an extremely weak non-conference schedule next year but Sark's performance against PAC-12 teams is what needs to be the most scrutinized next season. Going 5-4 against PAC-12 competition is one thing, but when we are losing those games by double digits we have a problem.

I say the program is looking up. But if the Huskies take a step back next year, I don't care what the excuse is Sark needs to be gone. He has not earned the benefit of the doubt to retain his job if the team regresses.

 

[mcnabb7542]

Wiz it's a sports board and of course everyone's opinion isn't always gonna be the same, hence my thoughts I posted above with that I will also add;

You asked the simple question of "how do fans feel about the state of the program as of today?" There is gonna be three stages in a question like that, some are gonna feel fine with it and are prepared for a longer wait. Second group isn't rioting, but they are questioning certain issues that have plagued the program for a few seasons now, and third you have the group that is rioting and wants someones ass.

With that said, I'm the guy in the middle, I'm not saying "fire Sark" I'm asking why is there this one step forward and three steps back with this program? Why can't there be a little more "urgency" from this team in big games, yes I know they "practice like they play" but why wouldn't there be a little more urgency going into a practice week of a big game?

As for his recruiting, yes there is depth at the wide out,and depth at the RB and slowly the OL, but lets talk about the defense. Five star four star guys committing but they wont be here for two more years, what about now? Look at Stanford, front seven that can beat anyone in the Pac, why isn't there a little more urgency on the defense? He got rid of Holt cause he wanted something different, well where is it? Wilcox is a stud in my eyes taken this talent and making them somewhat respectable, but where is the four star, five star guys now for this unit?

My point is you want to take the next step, it starts with your defense, not a hurry up offense, you were here just like I was Wiz when James made is change to this program, and the reason they won a title and a ton of games was the simple fact they had sound defenses, sure one year there defense was more then just sound it was a teams worst nightmare. This is why teams like Bama, Auburn, win titles they play defense first, this conference is an offensive shoot out, but you look at one team year in and year out in this conference, they play defense, good defense, and they shake this conference up every season.

 

[TheDayMan]

In some ways Sark is the victim of his own early success. To go from 0-12 to 5-7 and then 7-5 in 3 seasons has to be unprecedented. He took someone else's kids that pretty much sucked as bad as you can and won with them very fast. To me that begs the question of just how bad are the coaches at Colorado and Cal? But I digress. Sark hit the middle of the road with less than quality players.

I don't really buy that Sark's a victim of his early success. Some may see it that way, but even if the rebuilding took a more natural seeming path to where we are right now I would think we should all still have some concerns. And a side note, I don't think the talent Sark inherited was quite as bad as we like to remember. There was absolutely no depth, but there was some talent, at least on the offensive side. If Willingham and his staff inched their heads just a little closer to being out of their asses, they could have seen a few wins too.

]This year we expected more as we added depth, a senior QB, and had one of the top RB's in the nation. What happened though is Price took steps forward, but also took parts of games off at times and didn't play up to expectations in every game. He will tell you that himself. They also showed how much behind both of their lines are compared to Oregon and ASU specifically. I would say we also saw some growing pains in the brand new offense and Sark's play calling in it. Combine that with all of the stupid penalties and we had plenty to be frustrated with.

I don't see Price as having taken steps forward this year. He played well against shitty defense, and had a few moments against good defense, but never was able to carry the team to any memorable victories. That's kind of the story of his career. I suppose if we want to call not turning the ball over multiple times in multiple close games taking steps forward I could agree with you.

I think unflinchingly sticking with Price for three (or two) years was a bad move. I get there wasn't much other option last year, but the way he played to end the season warranted a little competition over the off-season. I do get that Sark probably wanted his senior quarterback to lead the team and wanted to set that tone from the start. But I think there can be some debate as to whether Price really was the best option to give the team the best chance of winning this year. I know that's easy to say and easy to argue without much to go on, so it's really irrelevant. I'm just glad we get to start over at the position next year.

I said going into this year that I expected 8 wins and possibly 9 if things went well. i expected to see a much better team, but that schedule was brutal in my opinion. There are two ways to look at the schedule and what you would prefer based on your goals: Want your toughest games on the road, or at home. When your toughest games are on the road you fully expect to lose those, but improve your odds of winning those closely matched ones at home. This makes for a schedule where 10 wins might be easier to reach with the teams you weren't going to beat anyway being on the road. The other way is really for those looking to reach 12 wins and you want those toughest games at home where you have less chance for slipping and expect your team to hold up on the road games in close ones. Where this team is at now we would do better with the hard ones on the road. Put Oregon on the road and maybe UCLA at home and would we have had 9 wins? How about a swap between Colorado on the road and Stanford at home? 10 maybe? We didn't have a schedule that was setup for a double digit win with a team that had only a few senior starters and was breaking in a brand new offense.

I'm done hearing about this team's brutal schedules, especially considering the way the out of conference scheduling is going. The conference schedule may have been tougher than some others, but using that as any kind of excuse needs to stop. UW isn't changing conferences any time soon, and the conference schedule is out of anyone's hands. Beating, or at least playing well against good teams is something that is going to need to happen.

SARK: I think he showed some mistakes over the season with play calling and managing his team in the hurry up. Why wouldn't he considering he hasn't ever ran it at any level? I do think he has made improvement on it and I think that's all we can ask. At least he is willing to adapt to the changing game is being proactive in using what he sees as the very best schemes to get to the top of the conference. Jury is out on if it will end up making us into champions again.

The biggest problem I have with him this year is the penalties. They had too many in the Stanford game and it cost them the win. We can point to ASJ's drop, Price's low throw late, or the kicker with a bad back, but even with all of those had they just had a couple of less penalties they win that game. What would the UCLA game have been like without the stupid self inflicted penalties that just killed them? That is coaching and it has been a problem over his entire tenure here. I will not view him as a coach for the future of our program until he can get that one big glaring problem worked out.

I don't blame him for Price's inconsistency as he was still the best option this team had in every game he played. I know you don't agree and others may not as well, but that's how I see it.

So to answer the question about when does recruiting start to take hold I'd say it already has and will continue to do so, but this program needs more stability and we need to finish his full cycles before we judge whether or not they can reach the 10+ regular season win totals with any regularity like we all believe we should. Price was recruited in his first class and there hasn't been a stud guy behind him ready to go until this year. Ask Tedford how important having a quality veteran QB is to the success or failure of a program. Let's see what a senior class consisting of a 23rd rated class does over the crumbs left off a 64th rated class and see if it isn't better. Let's see what the depth behind them looks like when those are even higher ranked. Let's see what this team can do over the next couple of years with 5th year seniors all around the starting ranks and more importantly, going more than a full year with the same offense, same defense, and same staff in place to teach it.

Those are the reasons I'm not ready to give up on Sark. He does need to do something about the penalties or I won't ever view his teams as potential national championship quality. I do think even with those penalties he can reach CCG winning status if he keeps recruiting well.

I agree with all of this (minus the Price thing). Voting "stagnant" to me isn't saying bail on Sark. He deserves some more time. I just don't agree that this season was successful, at all. If you want to argue that the rebuilding process is still happening and look at where we have come since 0-12 I understand that. But we don't have to try to come up with reasons to try say this season was kind of a success to argue that Sark needs more time.

Two stagnant seasons however, and it's time to look elsewhere... Next year the team needs to take a clear step forward.

 

[TheDayMan]

My point is you want to take the next step, it starts with your defense, not a hurry up offense, you were here just like I was Wiz when James made is change to this program, and the reason they won a title and a ton of games was the simple fact they had sound defenses, sure one year there defense was more then just sound it was a teams worst nightmare. This is why teams like Bama, Auburn, win titles they play defense first, this conference is an offensive shoot out, but you look at one team year in and year out in this conference, they play defense, good defense, and they shake this conference up every season.

Very good point. This is something I'm still trying to figure out. Why try to out pace established great offensive teams?

 

[WizardHawk]

mcnabb, you and I agree more than you think. Of course you aren't going to get anywhere without making major strides on the defensive side of the ball. I believe fully that Wilcox is moving us there. That D has improved both of the last two years and I think they will be ready to make another step forward next year.

I'll go you one farther and say you won't win championships without dominating on both lines which is something that also happened under James. I don't need to tell you that we are not graduating anyone off the offensive line and only 1 or 2 regulars off the defensive front 7. That makes a HUGE difference. The same O line that struggled against ASU really picked it up more as the season went further along. You don't get a 1700+ yard rusher without a line that can do heavy lifting. If ASJ comes back that running offense is going to be even better.

On the D Kihaha is starting to really get it and is looking like the next Sutton. There are a couple of other guys really coming on now that are going to make that a pass rush and run stopping force to be reckoned with next year.

I have no issues with anyone saying they aren't happy. I'm sure not satisfied and wouldn't dream of asking anyone else to be either. I still see reason to have optimism that the current staff might keep moving forward, but none of us knows if they will. I only present reasons why I believe what I do. I enjoy reading opposing views and discussing it.

This is year 2 of the new defense and year 1 of the new offense. It is still a work in progress on both sides. Adding a very seasoned line on both sides next year leaves me really looking forward to seeing the advances in both. I'm not sure what a rookie starter will do, but there are plenty of weapons for him to work with. I think next year is the season to demand 10 or more wins and not accept anything less. they need to play on the road and stop those stupid penalties and that's on Sark.

 

[mcnabb7542]

Very good point. This is something I'm still trying to figure out. Why try to out pace established great offensive teams?

Exactly!

Now playing the other side, maybe there isn't talent on the defensive side they don't feel comfortable offering scholarships too ( though I'm still frickn pissed about Jack from UCLA) and if that story is true, then someone in Dawgville really pissed that one away...

Bottomline is simple, you got depth and talent on the offense, now go out and find some beef to play the defensive side, I remember a kid from Spokane they found in the late 80's hay in his hair, but the guy was built like a frickn brick building, and his career here end with a title and him being a finalist for the Hesiman his senior year...

 

[mcnabb7542]

mcnabb, you and I agree more than you think. Of course you aren't going to get anywhere without making major strides on the defensive side of the ball. I believe fully that Wilcox is moving us there. That D has improved both of the last two years and I think they will be ready to make another step forward next year.

I'll go you one farther and say you won't win championships without dominating on both lines which is something that also happened under James. I don't need to tell you that we are not graduating anyone off the offensive line and only 1 or 2 regulars off the defensive front 7. That makes a HUGE difference. The same O line that struggled against ASU really picked it up more as the season went further along. You don't get a 1700+ yard rusher without a line that can do heavy lifting. If ASJ comes back that running offense is going to be even better.

On the D Kihaha is starting to really get it and is looking like the next Sutton. There are a couple of other guys really coming on now that are going to make that a pass rush and run stopping force to be reckoned with next year.

I have no issues with anyone saying they aren't happy. I'm sure not satisfied and wouldn't dream of asking anyone else to be either. I still see reason to have optimism that the current staff might keep moving forward, but none of us knows if they will. I only present reasons why I believe what I do. I enjoy reading opposing views and discussing it.

This is year 2 of the new defense and year 1 of the new offense. It is still a work in progress on both sides. Adding a very seasoned line on both sides next year leaves me really looking forward to seeing the advances in both. I'm not sure what a rookie starter will do, but there are plenty of weapons for him to work with. I think next year is the season to demand 10 or more wins and not accept anything less. they need to play on the road and stop those stupid penalties and that's on Sark.

I too believe 10 wins is not out of the norm for next season, if Sankey returns all bets are on, even with Miles at QB full time, I think this kid is gonna be good, sure he's gonna throw picks, and make some foolish mistakes, but he's young and I also believe it wont be as bad as everyone would think.
The help for him is an OL that is dominate, and a defense that can bail him out from time to time and give him some turnovers.....

 

[Destroydacre]

I was wavering between stagnant and unhappy and went with unhappy. To put it bluntly the team should be better than this. Yes the two latest wins were nice, but every year has had some of those. The losses to ASU and UCLA are really what did it this year and until UW can prove it can win those types of games there's no reason to believe that they can. I'm 100% sure Sark will be back next year, but I wouldn't be upset one bit if he moved on. Other programs without Washington's history have managed to turn things around much quicker (such as Stanford) and it gets really old seeing other teams accomplish what UW cannot. I want to see a win over Oregon, I want to see this team go on the road against a top 10 team in conference and consistently put up a fight. It was looking so good when they did that against Stanford earlier in the year, but it fell apart quickly after. Even with 8 (potentially 9) wins I'm not particularly happy with this season at all and if you think I'm impatient or expect too much, that's fine. But I personally feel UW should be better than this. For the 5th straight season it's "maybe next year."

 

[WizardHawk]

The reason they went to the hurry up no huddle wasn't to out pace Oregon or the others running it.

Sark said he had been interested in aspects of running it for several years, but didn't have the quality and depth needed to do it justice. They started it this year because they felt they had enough veteran experience in the line to handle the pace and a QB able to go with the new stuff without getting lost in it.

Why do it at all? If you like your offense and believe it can score on anyone then it makes sense to attempt as many offensive plays as you can get out of a game. That others are doing the same thing and do it better than you isn't a reason not to do it. The same downside to running it against others who also run uptempo is the other very reason they had to go to it. Their defense gets to see it all the time and help mitigate the substitution and play calling problems.

Basically our defense is far more able to play at the pace and, get their calls, make their substitutions, and get in their assignments because they get to practice against that pace a lot. UW's offense set several team records and improved in almost every statistical category.

Granted that Oregon's defense isn't bothered by our pace, but if you believe you have an offense that can score then still doing uptempo gives you more chances. That the teams that have beaten them haven't been uptempo isn't any type of indication that running it yourself actually hurts your chances. They are years ahead of everyone else running it and simply haven't gone up against a team that is mature enough with it to give them fits. It will happen.

What troubles me more is that next year we are likely going to look a lot more like Oregon. We have been doing uptempo but with the pro set offense this year. That is different than what Oregon runs. Now with 3 dual threat QB's you just know we are going to run a lot more read option. Why wouldn't Sark use looks that have worked for the best team in the country running uptempo with dual threat QB's? But how much chance do you have at out doing Oregon at exactly their own game? And haven't people pretty much been questioning if this offense in general is even effective against power set teams? I mean we would all take 10-11 win seasons now over what we have had, but you don't want to get up to the big stage and find out your game can't match up.

I don't like the way it is going, but I'm going to give it a chance to see if Sark can do more with it than we are giving them credit for.

 

[WizardHawk]

Just a reminder on next years schedule.

When saying we should expect 10 wins that is like saying expecting 9 this year. UW gets to take advantage of the Hawaii away game rule and will have 13 regular season games. As you can guess that is our only OOC road game and the 3 home games? Eastern Wa, Illinois, and Georgia State.

So they had better have 4 wins coming into conference play. If we follow the same pattern as our first two years in the Pac12 then next year we will again skip USC and Utah and flip home/away with this years games. That gives us Oregon, Cal, and WSU on the road in the north with Stanford and Oregon state at home, and Colorado, Arizona on the road in the south and UCLA , Arizona State at home.

They have to go 6-3 over that conference slate to reach 10 wins. Obviously the order of them and where their bye week would fall will have some impact on it, but 6-3 is fairly modest growth.

 

[RegentDenali]

One thing people need to remember going into 2014 as well. As per NCAA bowl eligibility rules, if you play a 13 game regular season, you have to have 7 wins to qualify for post season play.

Thus most of the PAC will need 6 wins to go bowling, UW will need 7. That's why it's critical we don't lay an egg in any of those OOC games, especially opening up at Aloha stadium which is never easy, even against the current state of UH. Not the best place to be breaking in a new QB as well. Ask USC about that one. At least it's nice Miles, if he does get the start job next year, got all those snaps, including the start @ OSU this year.

But considering the teams we played on the road this year, we should be getting UCLA, ASU, and Stanford @ Husky stadium next year.

Won't know dates till mid 2014, but our schedule should look something like:

Home:

EWU
Illinois
Georgia State
Stanford
ASU
UCLA
Oregon St.

Away:
Hawaii
Arizona
Oregon
Cal
Colorado
WSU - Apple Cup

I like our chances in 2014 to repeat 8+ games. 9+ Ws looks very doable considering the amount of Jrs and SRs we got on the roster, plus Stingfellow and Ross. Boom.

 

[blstoker]

Not to be a downer (especially with being a Coug fan) but I think it would be a mistake to take EWU lightly. I mean, they beat OSU in Corvalis this season, and won in Seattle year before last. They are currently #3 in the FCS, I believe. Adams is a really good QB and is only a Sophomore this year.

I'm not saying that the Huskies won't win the game in any sense of the word, but the Eagles do tend to beat at least 1 FBS school a year in recent history.

 

[Cloud]

USC Trojans interview Washington Huskies' Steve Sarkisian - ESPN Los Angeles

 

[kcden]

Not to be a downer (especially with being a Coug fan) but I think it would be a mistake to take EWU lightly. I mean, they beat OSU in Corvalis this season, and won in Seattle year before last. They are currently #3 in the FCS, I believe. Adams is a really good QB and is only a Sophomore this year.

I'm not saying that the Huskies won't win the game in any sense of the word, but the Eagles do tend to beat at least 1 FBS school a year in recent history.

Who did they beat in Seattle?
When they played the Huskies, it was closer than it should have been, but UW won.

 

[Ironbreaker]

Home:

EWU W
Illinois W
Georgia State W
Stanford W
ASU L
UCLA W
Oregon St. W

Away:
Hawaii W
Arizona W
Oregon L
Cal W
Colorado W
WSU L

10-3
6-3 Conference
4-2 road


Sarks a bad ass! Glad we didn't fire him!!

Oh wait. He went to USC. sum-bitch...