THE PAC 12 THREAD v.3

[Olyduck]

i will later. my work computer is in and out with this site. i dont wanna type much and have it kick me out.

 

[WizardHawk]

Doesn't look good for the Washington fans who talk about how the facilities and peterson are going to vault them to higher pastures. USC got a huge bump from 25th last year to 6th.

What doesn't look good for us? Some preseason ranking? Yeah, because those decide seasons right? lol

Seriously, I don't think many (any?) UW fans are predicting they will be a top ranked team this year given they will be very young in the secondary, starting a brand new QB, and a brand new RB (or at least new starter/feature), and will be doing it under brand new schemes and systems to them.

Add in their probable starting QB missing all of spring ball because he's a fucking douchewaffle that attacked Seahawk fans after the SB and that's not the way you go take a major step forward.

I'm not worried about rankings during the season so why on earth would I care about them months before fall camp.

Besides, the talk about Petersen bringing the program to the next level was never about already being there before they have even played a game. Took sark 5 years to win 8 games and 9 wins are expected this year because of the extra game they get and that would still more or less equal the best Sark ever had. Is 9-4 good enough to be top 25? Probably not, but who knows. The idea about going up from here is about his ability to recruit and build up the program and that isn't going to happen in year one.

Most teams bringing in new coaches go through growing pains for at least 2-3 years as they start to get 'their kids' in and really get their culture and systems running as second nature to them. Can be longer if it is a substantial change.

Sark should hit the ground running pretty much because of his familiarity with that program and how similar Kiffen was anyway.

Petersen should eventually have a much better program top to bottom and has everything he needs to build a conference contender. Expecting that today is not very realistic.

 

[socaljim242]

What doesn't look good for us? Some preseason ranking? Yeah, because those decide seasons right? lol

Seriously, I don't think many (any?) UW fans are predicting they will be a top ranked team this year given they will be very young in the secondary, starting a brand new QB, and a brand new RB (or at least new starter/feature), and will be doing it under brand new schemes and systems to them.

Add in their probable starting QB missing all of spring ball because he's a fucking douchewaffle that attacked Seahawk fans after the SB and that's not the way you go take a major step forward.

I'm not worried about rankings during the season so why on earth would I care about them months before fall camp.

Besides, the talk about Petersen bringing the program to the next level was never about already being there before they have even played a game. Took sark 5 years to win 8 games and 9 wins are expected this year because of the extra game they get and that would still more or less equal the best Sark ever had. Is 9-4 good enough to be top 25? Probably not, but who knows. The idea about going up from here is about his ability to recruit and build up the program and that isn't going to happen in year one.

Most teams bringing in new coaches go through growing pains for at least 2-3 years as they start to get 'their kids' in and really get their culture and systems running as second nature to them. Can be longer if it is a substantial change.

Sark should hit the ground running pretty much because of his familiarity with that program and how similar Kiffen was anyway.

Petersen should eventually have a much better program top to bottom and has everything he needs to build a conference contender. Expecting that today is not very realistic.

Well first off it's not a pre season ranking. It's how a panel thinks the future is looking for programs. I would post Washingtons profile but they didn't make the top 25. As for Sark he started with Tys teams right and it was his first head coaching job and Peterson is starting with Sarks players and new facilities kinda two different points don't you think?

 

[WizardHawk]

Well first off it's not a pre season ranking. It's how a panel thinks the future is looking for programs. I would post Washingtons profile but they didn't make the top 25. As for Sark he started with Tys teams right and it was his first head coaching job and Peterson is starting with Sarks players and new facilities kinda two different points don't you think?

Not sure what your point is. I said new HC's can take time to get their players and schemes in place. What does this have to do with Willingham? Talk about defensive, I actually said Sark should be up to speed faster than Petersen given his similarity to Kiffen and his familiarity with that program so not sure why you felt the need to get all pissy over my bringing up where he was after 5 years.

Lighten up Francis.


Rankings, Panels, blah blah blah. None of them win games. If you think I'm going to give two shits about ANY panel, ranking, or other type of arbitrary list you are mistaken.

 

[socaljim242]

Not sure what your point is. I said new HC's can take time to get their players and schemes in place. What does this have to do with Willingham? Talk about defensive, I actually said Sark should be up to speed faster than Petersen given his similarity to Kiffen and his familiarity with that program so not sure why you felt the need to get all pissy over my bringing up where he was after 5 years.

Lighten up Francis.


Rankings, Panels, blah blah blah. None of them win games. If you think I'm going to give two shits about ANY panel, ranking, or other type of arbitrary list you are mistaken.

My point was it's not a pre season poll which you still don't seem to comprehend because you went on about this years team. Try reading again and you will see it's what they think the FUTURE (maybe that you can understand) looks like when taking things like recruiting classes, current talent, facilities, location and coaching into consideration. They are trying to pick out teams who have solid runs in them soon.
As far as being pissy, your response was a big whine fest so I have no idea what you're talking about.
You said it took Sark five years to win 8 games. I pointed out Sark followed a coach who won 0 games (zero) his last year and that Peterson is starting off with a much better team and with new facilities and that it's two different points ( remember you are the one who is comparing them).
How about you stop being so sensitive it's just their opinions. You can disagree, you don't have to be a little bitch about it.

 

[seahawksfan234]

Cyler Miles is going to be the UW starting QB. No doubt about it. Insider information for you all here: While he was away from the team, he still received coaching from the UW coaching staff. They never intended to kick him off the team. All my vcash says that he will be the starter for the Huskies. Troy Williams is the only one who stands a chance against him, and Williams has less experience.

 

[WhiteMamba]

Cyler Miles is going to be the UW starting QB. No doubt about it. Insider information for you all here: While he was away from the team, he still received coaching from the UW coaching staff. They never intended to kick him off the team. All my vcash says that he will be the starter for the Huskies. Troy Williams is the only one who stands a chance against him, and Williams has less experience.

Reported to NCAA investigations.

 

[seahawksfan234]

Well first off it's not a pre season ranking. It's how a panel thinks the future is looking for programs. I would post Washingtons profile but they didn't make the top 25. As for Sark he started with Tys teams right and it was his first head coaching job and Peterson is starting with Sarks players and new facilities kinda two different points don't you think?

Same guy who told me about Miles, also told me that Sark was a huge dick behind the scenes and the players really disliked him, apparently he acts like a super arrogant d-bag. Apparently everyone really likes Chris Petersen though. I was surprised to hear that about Sark considering the fact that when I met him, he was really nice.

The Trojans should do well under Sark though. With their resources and ability to recruit, USC will be top 10 again soon. Sark is an average/above average coach with excellent assistant, with USC's talent he'd have to be terrible not to do well.

He will go to the NFL the second he is offered a gig though.

 

[socaljim242]

Reported to NCAA investigations.

Beat me to it.lol

 

[socaljim242]

Same guy who told me about Miles, also told me that Sark was a huge dick behind the scenes and the players really disliked him, apparently he acts like a super arrogant d-bag. Apparently everyone really likes Chris Petersen though. I was surprised to hear that about Sark considering the fact that when I met him, he was really nice.

The Trojans should do well under Sark though. With their resources and ability to recruit, USC will be top 10 again soon. Sark is an average/above average coach with excellent assistant, with USC's talent he'd have to be terrible not to do well.

He will go to the NFL the second he is offered a gig though.

That's odd. I know plenty of people who have been around Sark ( I've just met and shook hands) in his early days and now as head coach and arrogant was never a description. Passionate and California laid back were the two I heard the most. I don;t recall hearing players don't like him in fact it was the opposite that maybe he was too much a players coach. Kiffin was truly arrogant and you couldn't find two friends with such different personalities.

 

[RegentDenali]

That ESPN "future" rankings has to be one of the dumbest things yet from the EastCoast Sports Propaganda Network. But it's July and that's usually when the useless filler articles about football hits it peak.

Every damn season of football is an eternity. So much can change from year to year, even with the current elite programs.

 

[WizardHawk]

My point was it's not a pre season poll which you still don't seem to comprehend because you went on about this years team. Try reading again and you will see it's what they think the FUTURE (maybe that you can understand) looks like when taking things like recruiting classes, current talent, facilities, location and coaching into consideration. They are trying to pick out teams who have solid runs in them soon.
As far as being pissy, your response was a big whine fest so I have no idea what you're talking about.
You said it took Sark five years to win 8 games. I pointed out Sark followed a coach who won 0 games (zero) his last year and that Peterson is starting off with a much better team and with new facilities and that it's two different points ( remember you are the one who is comparing them).
How about you stop being so sensitive it's just their opinions. You can disagree, you don't have to be a little bitch about it.

I realize you are former military, but you can remove that stick from your ass any time you like now. They don't require you keep it after you leave.

I understood full well what FUTURE means asshole. You can't get to there without starting here. Sark's start impacts where he can go and how fast. Same with Petersen.

I said I don't give a flying fuck about what your panel thinks about their future. It won't determine the outcome of ANY game. I'm not sure I can be any more clear.

 

[Olyduck]

Well they went by. Recent recruiting success (that usually results in better teams down the road)-
Facilities
coaches
if the program has money ( for recruiting- coaches salaries)
location (easier sell Austin over Madison)
current talent level

Here's Oregon

Coaching: Frankly, as of right now, there isn't a tremendous amount of faith in second-year coach Mark Helfrich.

"I think Oregon will be a seven-win program in three years," someone familiar with the program told me this week while I was in Portland, Oregon, for the Elite 11 finals. "[Helfrich] seems like a nice guy, but I don't think he's the right guy for the job."

Edwards wasn't that direct, but he agreed there are questions after Year 1. "It's too early to really say with any certainty what kind of coach he is," Edwards said. "The odds are against being able to promote the offensive coordinator as many times in a row and it being successful each time."

The Stanford loss last fall was one thing, Edwards added, but getting crushed by Arizona was another. Recall that the Ducks were saying that week that the Rose Bowl was beneath them.

"Everyone said that would not have happened under Chip Kelly," Edwards said. "You would not have had guys complaining about the Rose Bowl and then come out flat in a conference game. That was kind of a strike one on Helfrich in the minds of a lot of people."

Add to that a change at DC with Nick Aliotti retiring after 17 years. That's more uncertainty, even if his replacement, Don Pellum, had coached Oregon's LBs for 13 years.

"I don't think there's a close No. 2 when it comes to the pressure to win right now," Huard said. "That's not a hot-seat conversation. It's a reality of where their program is, to the heights that Kelly took it. You kind of have to win now or else."

Current talent: A big reason for Huard saying that is that Oregon has such an experienced team in 2014. For now, with QB Marcus Mariota and CB Ifo Ekpre-Olomu leading the way, the Ducks are loaded.

They should be a playoff team. But Oregon, thanks largely to Stanford, has had a way of falling just short of big expectations.

"If you don't get over that hump with an NFL franchise quarterback, and with the way the conference is improving around you, when do you win?" Huard said.

Recruiting: The past three times we've ranked Oregon classes 18th, 26th and 27th. (The Ducks are currently 18th.) That does not preclude a program from success, but it doesn't suggest elite-level talent, either. The Ducks have been outstanding at ID'ing players for their system, but is that sustainable in an increasingly difficult conference?

There are real questions about who will follow Mariota, or what that plan is. Four-star Travis Waller, who participated in the Elite 11 finals and The Opening, did not draw rave reviews from our recruiting analysts.

Title path: "Even if Chip [Kelly] were still there, I don't know that it would make a huge difference," Edwards said. "I think the fact that USC is getting its scholarship numbers back changes the landscape of that conference. It no longer sets up where Oregon and Stanford can just dominate and it basically comes down to who wins the [Pac-12] North."

It's fair to ask: How open is Oregon's window?

Program power: Despite a somewhat gloomy picture being painted, Oregon still does have one heck of an ace in Nike owner Phil Knight.

He supported the endeavor to make the Oregon brand what it is. You think he's just going to let that wither?

Knight is the biggest reason that the Ducks are still an 8.8 in this category.

I feel like the faith or lack of in Helfrich is laughable. there were a lot of people skeptical of a rather unknown OC with no head coaching experience from New hampshire with only 2 years as an OC at a BCS level school then by the time he leaves everyone worships his dumps like they are gold. I for one am not skeptical and have faith in him.
A 7 win program? really?
Yes the odds are against it Bellotti OC to HC and had success. Kelly did it and had success that made Bellotti's success look silly. but would anyone consider it unsuccessful? Bellotti went 11-1 in his best season ever Helfrich goes 11-2 in his first season and there are questions?
I don't believe that those statements woulndt have been made if Kelly was still there vs Helfrich. the coaches dont know what is going to be said by the players. the players have minds and mouths of their own. and to count that as a stirke? Sorry but if thats a strike against Helfrich what were the Blount, Masoli, Harris incidents? just to name a few.
I am more on board with the questions of Pellum as the new DC but not enough to say they are going to fall soooooooo far off from their rather average defense that they are going to fall to an average team with only 7 wins.
Current talent and the fact that Oregon cant get over the hump well that wasnt exclusive to Helfrich's first season. Kelly had issues with Stanford too. and USC, and LSU and Boise. Bellotti had issues too.
Oregons last 3 recruiting classes averaged by those rankings is 23. average of 21 by rivals. the prior 3 was only 18 so its not like Oregon is changing that much in recruiting.
No one knew who was going to replace Masoli. Thomas stepped in pretty well. Everyone thought Bennett was the heir apparent to Thomas (everyone but me. I lived in Hawaii and had a feeling on Mariota based on his school and some other stuff I found out about him) So there are questions about Mariota's replacement. Waller didnt receive rave reviews from ESPN's recruiting analysts? I wonder if those were the same guys that had Mariota as a 2 star.
USC coming back but they didnt exactly have a strangle hold on the conference even with Carroll. They shared the title 3 of those 7. they lost games they shoulndt have almost every season. (Oregon State, Stanford, UCLA) teams were catching up to them even before the sanctions. Carroll is a better coach than Sark. not singling out USC just going off what the article talked about.

 

[seahawksfan234]

That's odd. I know plenty of people who have been around Sark ( I've just met and shook hands) in his early days and now as head coach and arrogant was never a description. Passionate and California laid back were the two I heard the most. I don;t recall hearing players don't like him in fact it was the opposite that maybe he was too much a players coach. Kiffin was truly arrogant and you couldn't find two friends with such different personalities.

I've met Sark a couple of times and I seriously was shocked to hear that he was a dick. The Sark I had met matched a similar description to what you're saying, but the guy I was talking to worked in the athletic department with the football team during his undergrad and was around Sark a ton, said a lot of the players were happy when he left.

I have trashed Sark a lot for his lack of integrity, but this isn't me trying to trash him, just sharing what I heard. In my experience, he was really cool and laid back. Apparently he just puts on a front to seem like a nice guy, but behind the scenes he's a dick.

I heard the same thing about him being a players coach and from my experience with him, I'd agree with that statement. Mostly just relaying the description from someone who had a lot more experience around Sark than I did.

Dick or not, Sark will probably do well at USC. His personality is really irrelevant to if he will be successful or not. Just the offseason and thought I'd share that.

 

[seahawksfan234]

Oh and apparently Sark's wife is a mega kent. I was told there was rumors that he was banging one of the cheerleading coaches.

Surprised that he would go for the coach when he could have any one of the much hotter cheerleaders.

 

[RegentDenali]

Four-star OT Andre James (Herriman, Utah) committed to UCLA on Thursday night at The Opening...

James chose UCLA over a final group that included Ohio State, Oklahoma, Oregon, USC, and Utah.

 

[RegentDenali]

Oh and apparently Sark's wife is a mega kent. I was told there was rumors that he was banging one of the cheerleading coaches.

Surprised that he would go for the coach when he could have any one of the much hotter cheerleaders.

Maybe she's a kent because his wondering peen that's worth millions each year now keeps finding its way into side action he couldn't of obtained when he was just a coordinator.

If Sark ever gives up football, he should go into politics. He's got the robotic "saying what people want to hear" delivery down to perfection.

 

[socaljim242]

I realize you are former military, but you can remove that stick from your ass any time you like now. They don't require you keep it after you leave.

I understood full well what FUTURE means asshole. You can't get to there without starting here. Sark's start impacts where he can go and how fast. Same with Petersen.

I said I don't give a flying fuck about what your panel thinks about their future. It won't determine the outcome of ANY game. I'm not sure I can be any more clear.

Once a Marine.... lol
FYI It's not my panel , the Oregon fan asked me to post the list from another source. So I posted it. Don't whine to me that your Huskies are not on it because I didn't make it. You obviously care way too much what that panel said (or in your teams case, didn't say) because you're crying about it big time. I'm amazed at your reaction it's like someone just told you the Easter bunny and Santa Claus don't exist or you've never heard something negative about your team.

 

[socaljim242]

I've met Sark a couple of times and I seriously was shocked to hear that he was a dick. The Sark I had met matched a similar description to what you're saying, but the guy I was talking to worked in the athletic department with the football team during his undergrad and was around Sark a ton, said a lot of the players were happy when he left.

I have trashed Sark a lot for his lack of integrity, but this isn't me trying to trash him, just sharing what I heard. In my experience, he was really cool and laid back. Apparently he just puts on a front to seem like a nice guy, but behind the scenes he's a dick.

I heard the same thing about him being a players coach and from my experience with him, I'd agree with that statement. Mostly just relaying the description from someone who had a lot more experience around Sark than I did.

Dick or not, Sark will probably do well at USC. His personality is really irrelevant to if he will be successful or not. Just the offseason and thought I'd share that.

Hmmmm. Years of nothing but a good reputation, players have liked him everywhere , didn't burn bridges with Pete or USC when he left . Sorry but when head coaches at major Universities are really jerks it's all over the place you don;t get it as some nugget from a towel boy.
You can google Charlie Weis and read tons of stories about his arrogance and I searched for stuff on Steve and the only bad stuff you got was disappointed Huskey players and that's understandable because he left for another school in the same conference. As for the cheerleader coach thing , again it sounds like some people just wanna make themselves feel better by putting him down and starting rumors. He was good enough for you guys to hire but nowwww he's a jerk.lol Gottcha

 

[socaljim242]

I feel like the faith or lack of in Helfrich is laughable. there were a lot of people skeptical of a rather unknown OC with no head coaching experience from New hampshire with only 2 years as an OC at a BCS level school then by the time he leaves everyone worships his dumps like they are gold. I for one am not skeptical and have faith in him.
A 7 win program? really?
Yes the odds are against it Bellotti OC to HC and had success. Kelly did it and had success that made Bellotti's success look silly. but would anyone consider it unsuccessful? Bellotti went 11-1 in his best season ever Helfrich goes 11-2 in his first season and there are questions?
I don't believe that those statements woulndt have been made if Kelly was still there vs Helfrich. the coaches dont know what is going to be said by the players. the players have minds and mouths of their own. and to count that as a stirke? Sorry but if thats a strike against Helfrich what were the Blount, Masoli, Harris incidents? just to name a few.
I am more on board with the questions of Pellum as the new DC but not enough to say they are going to fall soooooooo far off from their rather average defense that they are going to fall to an average team with only 7 wins.
Current talent and the fact that Oregon cant get over the hump well that wasnt exclusive to Helfrich's first season. Kelly had issues with Stanford too. and USC, and LSU and Boise. Bellotti had issues too.
Oregons last 3 recruiting classes averaged by those rankings is 23. average of 21 by rivals. the prior 3 was only 18 so its not like Oregon is changing that much in recruiting.
No one knew who was going to replace Masoli. Thomas stepped in pretty well. Everyone thought Bennett was the heir apparent to Thomas (everyone but me. I lived in Hawaii and had a feeling on Mariota based on his school and some other stuff I found out about him) So there are questions about Mariota's replacement. Waller didnt receive rave reviews from ESPN's recruiting analysts? I wonder if those were the same guys that had Mariota as a 2 star.
USC coming back but they didnt exactly have a strangle hold on the conference even with Carroll. They shared the title 3 of those 7. they lost games they shoulndt have almost every season. (Oregon State, Stanford, UCLA) teams were catching up to them even before the sanctions. Carroll is a better coach than Sark. not singling out USC just going off what the article talked about.

USC won 11 games or more every year over a seven year period ( two AP Titles) and didn't finish ranked lower than 5th in any of those years. Finished first or tied in the PAC for first in all seven. Played in seven straight BCS games only losing to Texas (and getting the Okl beatdown taken off the books) for the best BCS winning percentage of any team. Two Heismans (not counting Reggies) . But yeah, nothing special. You can show me seven or more years of any PAC team coming close to that since 2000. Heck USC won 4 Rose Bowls in those 7 years. Oregon has won 1 (Uno) in a hundred years. I guess that's what you call catching up.