The PAC12 THREAD v.2

[mrwallace2ku]

Same goes for that "newbie" @ USC TF...

 

[WizardHawk]

lol, first you give him credit for your recruiting class and ignore the question where I asked when doesn't USC have good classes? Just about any reasonable coach would have a top flight class there. Hell they weren't last in the conference with that total loser you just tossed out last season right?

Then you question our opinions because you basically accuse us of talking out of both sides of our mouths. I've said clearly I had issues with his staff the entire time he was here and can show you threads where I did raise questions, but also said as long as things are moving forward I'd still keep giving him a chance to prove himself. That's all I ever said about him while he was here. So how do I have a credibility problem in pointing out there were things we didn't like about how his teams played while he was here when we mentioned before he left?

He stuck with coach Holt for WAY too long. We were all saying if he couldn't bring himself to fire someone he considered a friend then we needed to fire him as well and find a new coach. You can't keep a guy that is trending downward and putting up the conferences worst defense, but he did. We were all HIGHLY critical of him through that.

Right before he bailed about half of our faithful up here wanted him gone. He was just wrapping up his 5th season season and had all of his own recruits in place and still wasn't showing the growth they wanted to see. It isn't just the end of season records, but lack of big time wins against rivals and ranked teams. Sure, he had a couple here and there, but nothing like we expect at UW.

The most the rest of us were saying is he has a chance to break the 7 game win mark and things are trending up, even if only at a snails pace. As long as there is no regression we are willing to keep giving him a chance. Don't mistake that for saying he is the second coming. He did raise the program out of the ashes left, but then stayed at that second tier, maybe even top of the third tier and didn't go up from there.

So it is us that is sorry your blind homerism over your new HC is blinding you to the reality of what he actually did at UW vs what you want to believe he did to make you feel better about your program moving forward.

UW is the kind of place where the right coach can win. Hell, even Neuheisel won a RB for our program and did it after taking it over at a time when it was struggling. There is a lot to offer kids here and a rabid community that supports the team. I mean surely you can remember the 'all I saw was purple' game right? ;-)

You can go right on thinking all that was lacking here was the upper level of recruits your program always gets anyway and that Sark will change that 7 into a 10 overnight because of it. But when you wake up to more and more scandals from the lack of control he has over his players and you end up 11th or 12th in the conf in penalties that kill your wins against big teams don't say you weren't warned. Fair enough?

 

[WizardHawk]

Have a feeling this is going to be a talking point for awhile until Coach P gets his sea legs back under him @ UWUB.

No one knows how well his schemes and style will translate into wins at this level. That is something we all questioned when people talked about him going to a major team, or when talks of BSU joining the pac kept coming up.

All we do know now is we weren't given a choice in our need to find a HC after Sark bailed on us. We had little time to find a replacement to at least put some kind of recruiting class together, especially after Sark completely raped what class we already had. And we ended up with the best candidate available. We all know the best candidate doesn't always translate to best results on the field, but right now it was a huge get and a huge win for our program.

He will be given some time to prove himself. There are questions this year about QB and seriously no depth in the secondary. Those are other things we were questioning Sark about by the way. Whose fault is it we will be forced to start two true freshmen in the secondary this year? Yeah, that brilliant recruiter at USC.

 

[mrwallace2ku]

forced to start two true freshmen in the secondary this year? Yeah, that brilliant recruiter at USC.

I'm sure "grandpa" and Mannion will be sure to exploit that Huskie weakness Whiz.

 

[WizardHawk]

I'm sure "grandpa" and Mannion will be sure to exploit that Huskie weakness Whiz.

You mean grandpa will exploit the two 4* kids starting back there with those also-rans you guys sport every year? Bring it on!

 

[trojanfan12]

lol, first you give him credit for your recruiting class and ignore the question where I asked when doesn't USC have good classes? Just about any reasonable coach would have a top flight class there. Hell they weren't last in the conference with that total loser you just tossed out last season right?

I didn't ignore anything. I pointed out that part of the reason Kiffin was fired was because his recruiting classes were getting worse. Also, I love how you try to set this up as a "no-win" for me. You said he had great recruiting classes at UW, then when I mention his 1st recruiting class at USC, you say "when doesn't USC get great recruits?" I guess you folks in the Great Northwest aren't so much into the reading comprehension and logic, huh?


Then you question our opinions because you basically accuse us of talking out of both sides of our mouths. I've said clearly I had issues with his staff the entire time he was here and can show you threads where I did raise questions, but also said as long as things are moving forward I'd still keep giving him a chance to prove himself. That's all I ever said about him while he was here. So how do I have a credibility problem in pointing out there were things we didn't like about how his teams played while he was here when we mentioned before he left?

I accused you of talking out of both sides of your mouth because that's exactly what you've been doing. Did 4d20 hack your account? You sound like him right now. I don't need you to pull posts, I've got one for you right here: Intellectually we can thank him for his job of bringing our program out of the ashes to the point where it was again attractive enough for a real HC to take the job and still want to set fire to his vehicle when he again walks the sideline on Montlake.

As I said, you give him credit for bringing you out of the ashes and then say he can't coach. That is the very definition of talking out of both sides of your mouth. The fact that you then claim he's not a "real HC" further demonstrates your inability to remove emotion from the discussion and why I don't just question your opinion, I really give it no credibility.

He stuck with coach Holt for WAY too long. We were all saying if he couldn't bring himself to fire someone he considered a friend then we needed to fire him as well and find a new coach. You can't keep a guy that is trending downward and putting up the conferences worst defense, but he did. We were all HIGHLY critical of him through that.

He wouldn't be the first coach to hang on to an assistant for too long and he won't be the last. But the fact that you even bring it up, shows that you are too emotionally invested in tearing him down to be credible.

Right before he bailed about half of our faithful up here wanted him gone. He was just wrapping up his 5th season season and had all of his own recruits in place and still wasn't showing the growth they wanted to see. It isn't just the end of season records, but lack of big time wins against rivals and ranked teams. Sure, he had a couple here and there, but nothing like we expect at UW.

What is this "nothing like we expect at UW" stuff? With a few exceptions, UW has traditionally been a 7-8 win per season program. Even under the Dawgfather you only averaged 8.5 wins per season. So where exactly do your "great expectations" come from. Sark brought your program back to exactly where it was under Don James.

The most the rest of us were saying is he has a chance to break the 7 game win mark and things are trending up, even if only at a snails pace. As long as there is no regression we are willing to keep giving him a chance. Don't mistake that for saying he is the second coming. He did raise the program out of the ashes left, but then stayed at that second tier, maybe even top of the third tier and didn't go up from there.

Snails pace? In the Dawgfathers first 5 seasons a UW he won 35 games. In 5 seasons at UW, Sark won 34 games. Again, exactly what has UW ever accomplished in it's history that would indicate your fanbase should be impatient?

So it is us that is sorry your blind homerism over your new HC is blinding you to the reality of what he actually did at UW vs what you want to believe he did to make you feel better about your program moving forward.

Considering how Sark's 5 seasons matched up with the Dawgfathers first 5 seasons, I'd say that the blind homerism lies with the Huskies along with a little revisionist history.

UW is the kind of place where the right coach can win. Hell, even Neuheisel won a RB for our program and did it after taking it over at a time when it was struggling. There is a lot to offer kids here and a rabid community that supports the team. I mean surely you can remember the 'all I saw was purple' game right? ;-)

The greatest coach in your programs history averaged 8.5 wins per season. How in the world will my poor little Trojans ever manage to compete with that? I guess we should just give up football? Or may be not, after all Lane Kiffin 8.5 wins per season at USC.

You can go right on thinking all that was lacking here was the upper level of recruits your program always gets anyway and that Sark will change that 7 into a 10 overnight because of it. But when you wake up to more and more scandals from the lack of control he has over his players and you end up 11th or 12th in the conf in penalties that kill your wins against big teams don't say you weren't warned. Fair enough?

This is hands down the most illogical and overly emotional part of your rant. I'll bet you bruised your keyboard typing it. In fact, it's only worthy on 1 response:

 

[mrwallace2ku]

You mean grandpa will exploit the two 4* kids starting back there with those also-rans you guys sport every year? Bring it on!

By the time Mannions done chuckin the rwak all over yer yard, we can downgrade them to the 2*s they shoulda been rated at all along! All the while my 3* WR's find holes in that "zone" Pete will employ to cover your 2ndaries weaknesses.

HA!

14-0 State after 1st quarter.

 

[WizardHawk]

lol, look who's getting angry now and going all personal. Thought we never got to you with this sark stuff?

I realize the truth hurts, but the truth is we were only so-s0 to sark before he bailed and had valid criticism of him even after his most successful season and now you want to paint some different picture of what he did (or didn't do) and what it translates to your program going forward.

What is this "nothing like we expect at UW" stuff? With a few exceptions, UW has traditionally been a 7-8 win per season program. Even under the Dawgfather you only averaged 8.5 wins per season. So where exactly do your "great expectations" come from. Sark brought your program back to exactly where it was under Don James.

I did love this though. You are now so fully vested in making up anything to make Sark seem better that you now engage in revisionist history. I love it!

First of all, 8.5 wins in the 80's isn't equal to 8.5 wins now is it? I mean you did get the memo that they added a game to the regular season right?

Second of all that line about never being a better team? You know nothing of UW history then. Clearly. I'd suggest you look at that history again since you brought it up. When I have more time (on my way out) later I'd be happy to help you with that.

You compare Sark to James in terms of how much they won in their first 5 seasons, but I already pointed out how quickly Neuheisl took them back to a RB. James created the legacy that paved the way. Of course we expect, no DEMAND we win at UW. It has been proven a good coach can, hell even a mediocre neuheisl did.

Sark didn't give us what we expected. Sorry, but that's a fact. I'll share the links later showing we thought that before he screwed his kids and bailed.

Do keep up the insults and anger though. I love that shit.

 

[OregonDucks]

USC can recruit itself, it doesn't matter who the coach is. I wouldnt applaud Sark for getting a high ranking recruiting class..Kids are going to go to SC regardless of who the coach is, Hell, top athletes still went to play for Lame Kiffin.

 

[mrwallace2ku]

 

[trojanfan12]

lol, look who's getting angry now and going all personal. Thought we never got to you with this sark stuff?

I realize the truth hurts, but the truth is we were only so-s0 to sark before he bailed and had valid criticism of him even after his most successful season and now you want to paint some different picture of what he did (or didn't do) and what it translates to your program going forward.


I did love this though. You are now so fully vested in making up anything to make Sark seem better that you now engage in revisionist history. I love it!

First of all, 8.5 wins in the 80's isn't equal to 8.5 wins now is it? I mean you did get the memo that they added a game to the regular season right?

Second of all that line about never being a better team? You know nothing of UW history then. Clearly. I'd suggest you look at that history again since you brought it up. When I have more time (on my way out) later I'd be happy to help you with that.

You compare Sark to James in terms of how much they won in their first 5 seasons, but I already pointed out how quickly Neuheisl took them back to a RB. James created the legacy that paved the way. Of course we expect, no DEMAND we win at UW. It has been proven a good coach can, hell even a mediocre neuheisl did.

Sark didn't give us what we expected. Sorry, but that's a fact. I'll share the links later showing we thought that before he screwed his kids and bailed.

Do keep up the insults and anger though. I love that shit.

Since when does posting facts about your programs history (or lack thereof) and accurately showing that you are overly emotional equate to me being angry? I'm actually smoking a little herb and laughing at how worked up you're getting over Sark.

I've already stated my case about Sark which is that I will hold my opinion until I see how the team performs on the field and that so far I have zero complaints. That may very well change. Hell, it might change when I go to the spring game if I don't like what I see. Until then, so far, so good.

You were the one that got all upset and started talking about scandals and violations. 8.5 wins is 8.5 wins regardless of the era and it's what your program has always been and what they will always be. No revisionist history, it's who you Huskies are. You don't have to like it, you just have to live it like you always have. Trying to project your own anger on to me won't change that.

Like I said, Sark may not have given you what you expected, but that's about your fanbase thinking your program is something that it isn't, not about his ability to coach.

Look at this way. Sark brought your program back to where it traditionally has always been, an 8 win, minor bowl program that once in a blue moon manages to get to the Rose Bowl.

If he does the same at USC and returns us to where we have always been traditionally, I think I'll be quite happy.

 

[trojanfan12]

USC can recruit itself, it doesn't matter who the coach is. I wouldnt applaud Sark for getting a high ranking recruiting class..Kids are going to go to SC regardless of who the coach is, Hell, top athletes still went to play for Lame Kiffin.

You what's funny? When USC was hit with the sanctions, all of you said: "It's over. USC is going to be down for years. Recruits won't want to go there with those sanctions and your going to be having 4-8 and 5-7 type seasons for 7-10 years".

Since we continued to recruit top talent and those losing seasons you were hoping for never materialized, now it's "USC recruits itself".

What can I say? At USC, we're not arrogant. We're just better than you.

 

[OregonDucks]

You what's funny? When USC was hit with the sanctions, all of you said: "It's over. USC is going to be down for years. Recruits won't want to go there with those sanctions and your going to be having 4-8 and 5-7 type seasons for 7-10 years".

Since we continued to recruit top talent and those losing seasons you were hoping for never materialized, now it's "USC recruits itself".

What can I say? At USC, we're not arrogant. We're just better than you.

I don't recall saying that. But the reason during your sanction years you weren't getting high recruiting classes was because you couldn't get as many 4-5 stars to boost your ranking. You still got top recruits to come to SC, just not as many.

 

[socaljim242]

t

His recruiting classes were great here as well and the players always seemed to buy in, but what did it get him on the field?

But more importantly, the kids under Petersen are all saying the accountability and expectations are WAY up under this new staff. The detailed attention to the fundamentals was also something that took them a bit by surprise. How much will that translate into wins? I don't know, but I'm glad the discipline is back on this team. It is something I talked about every season Sark was here. This isn't just something brought up after he left. He just doesn't push the fundamentals as was evidenced by the occasional lack of proper technique on tackling or routes and in the league leading number of penalties.

I also expect the current kids to pay the price in a few expulsions from the team. Sark put up with lots of stupidity from his players.

Happy about your recruiting? Since when didn't USC always find itself landing big time kids?

Sark can recruit, but can he get the most out of them and can he run a team of young men with the discipline needed to ensure they represent your university the way they should? He didn't do that for us, that's for sure.

Funny as a UW fan you're complaining that you didn't have discipline on your team with Sark who learned under Pete who as head coach of the Seahawks had the most penalized team in pro football last year . Pretty much what he was at USC. I'm willing to bet you're not complaining much about those undisciplined 2013 Seahawks are you? LOL

 

[trojanfan12]

I don't recall saying that. But the reason during your sanction years you weren't getting high recruiting classes was because you couldn't get as many 4-5 stars to boost your ranking. You still got top recruits to come to SC, just not as many.

I didn't mean you specifically OD. Most of us were still on cbs when the sanctions hit.

USC actually did quite well in recruiting for the first 2 seasons of the sanctions. We pulled in top 10 recruiting classes both seasons and the 2nd class was #1 on an "average stars per recruit" basis.

The recruiting class after the 3rd year (when we had gone 7-6) was not up to USC standards and when the recruiting class for this season started falling apart after the ASU debacle, Kiffin was fired. Sark was able to save what was left of that class, go back and get some who had de-committed to re-commit and then topped it off with landing JuJu, Adoree and Damien Mama.

Like I've said, I won't ultimately know what I think of Sark as our coach until I actually see him coach some games. As of right now, with the recruiting class and what the players are saying about spring practice, I have no complaints.

 

[mcnabb7542]

SWEET!! OD thinks UW got the better coach!! If that ain't the kiss of death for UW, I don't know what is!!



Thanks OD!!

translation, " I just tongued my sister"

 

[WizardHawk]

Since when does posting facts about your programs history (or lack thereof) and accurately showing that you are overly emotional equate to me being angry? I'm actually smoking a little herb and laughing at how worked up you're getting over Sark.

When you question the reading comprehension of someone you are indeed getting personal and showing how much the other person is getting under your skin. If you weren't getting angry you wouldn't need to get personal.

It is a pattern I've noticed with you though. You always start off by saying you don't get angry and no one gets under your skin, but yet you are way easier to troll about Sark than 4D20 or any other bammer is about anything bama. You ALWAYS end up on a massive defensive laden rant that inevitably goes personal. In fact that's when I always know I've won.

You were the one that got all upset and started talking about scandals and violations.

This too seems to be the norm for your posting during one of these rants. You accuse the other person of being 'all upset' when they clearly aren't. I mean I didn't get all personal and butt hurt, did you?

8.5 wins is 8.5 wins regardless of the era and it's what your program has always been and what they will always be.

First of all this is hilarious because Sark NEVER REACHED 8.5 WINS!!!!! I really hate when facts get in the way of a good story don't you?

Don James won his first conference championship in '77 going 10-2. I find it laughable that you try to even suggest Sark is in the same ball park as he was. That was his 3rd season as a head coach.

As for the idea of comparing number of wins being equal per era. You think winning 8 games when you play 11 is the same as winning 8 games when you play 12? lol. Are you really THAT high? When you bring up DJ's first 5 years why not tell everyone that 4 of them were with an 11 game schedule. Oh yeah, that doesn't help your incorrect narrative. Once again those pesky facts keep getting in the way of a good story by you don't they?

Sorry, but the facts are that James was 10x the HC Sark was by the end of his first 5 years including the fact that he didn't let us get beat by our biggest rival all 5 of those. You do remember who that rival was don't you? I'll remind you again of the 'all I saw was purple' game. For the record he went 2-3 against USC those first 5 years, but you don't want to know what he did after that.

No revisionist history, it's who you Huskies are. You don't have to like it, you just have to live it like you always have.

Who we have always been? Now I know you are smoking some great shit. UW still holds the record for most seasons without a loss and have always been one of the top teams in the conference. Sorry, but that's a plain old fact. So yes, you are trying to curve history to meet your argument without any basis of fact to support it. I do admit I'm amused by it though.

Like I said, Sark may not have given you what you expected, but that's about your fanbase thinking your program is something that it isn't, not about his ability to coach.

So Oregon can win 11+ games a year and their fans expect it, but for lil old UW with a looooong history of winning expects to regain a more than mediocre record with a decent coach they are delusional? I'm running out of lols here. Can only put 7 a post after all. So coach Neuheisl can win here, james and half a dozen other coaches before him can win championships here, but this HC you believe is going to take you to the promised land couldn't and we are the ones not using our heads? Wow dude, that's some great shit you are smoking there.

Look at this way. Sark brought your program back to where it traditionally has always been, an 8 win, minor bowl program that once in a blue moon manages to get to the Rose Bowl.

I know I already said it, but boy does this require a repeat here. He never took us to 8.5 wins. Now even if that number is somehow relevant, which it isn't for reasons already stated, your argument that he took us back there doesn't hold water. He never won more than 7 games in his 5 years here.

Damn those pesky facts!!! lol

If he does the same at USC and returns us to where we have always been traditionally, I think I'll be quite happy.

And as we have said, you can keep on wishing all you want. Anything is possible and we have said as much. I mean some coaches learn from their mistakes, but so far to date Sark has had the worst teams in the conference in penalties, has never produced a top shelf defense, and every one of his offenses shot themselves in the foot in almost every big game they had. This isn't speculation or open to interpretation. It is a fair and fully established history of his head coaching career.

Now please do continue on this rant of yours. I love it when you come unglued and go all personal and raged out on this stuff.

Oh, and be sure to tell us again how much none of this means anything to you while you spend hours on a vitriolic rampage over it. Always a good read.

 

[trojanfan12]

When you question the reading comprehension of someone you are indeed getting personal and showing how much the other person is getting under your skin. If you weren't getting angry you wouldn't need to get personal.

It is a pattern I've noticed with you though. You always start off by saying you don't get angry and no one gets under your skin, but yet you are way easier to troll about Sark than 4D20 or any other bammer is about anything bama. You ALWAYS end up on a massive defensive laden rant that inevitably goes personal. In fact that's when I always know I've won.


This too seems to be the norm for your posting during one of these rants. You accuse the other person of being 'all upset' when they clearly aren't. I mean I didn't get all personal and butt hurt, did you?



First of all this is hilarious because Sark NEVER REACHED 8.5 WINS!!!!! I really hate when facts get in the way of a good story don't you?

Don James won his first conference championship in '77 going 10-2. I find it laughable that you try to even suggest Sark is in the same ball park as he was. That was his 3rd season as a head coach.

As for the idea of comparing number of wins being equal per era. You think winning 8 games when you play 11 is the same as winning 8 games when you play 12? lol. Are you really THAT high? When you bring up DJ's first 5 years why not tell everyone that 4 of them were with an 11 game schedule. Oh yeah, that doesn't help your incorrect narrative. Once again those pesky facts keep getting in the way of a good story by you don't they?

Sorry, but the facts are that James was 10x the HC Sark was by the end of his first 5 years including the fact that he didn't let us get beat by our biggest rival all 5 of those. You do remember who that rival was don't you? I'll remind you again of the 'all I saw was purple' game. For the record he went 2-3 against USC those first 5 years, but you don't want to know what he did after that.


Who we have always been? Now I know you are smoking some great shit. UW still holds the record for most seasons without a loss and have always been one of the top teams in the conference. Sorry, but that's a plain old fact. So yes, you are trying to curve history to meet your argument without any basis of fact to support it. I do admit I'm amused by it though.


So Oregon can win 11+ games a year and their fans expect it, but for lil old UW with a looooong history of winning expects to regain a more than mediocre record with a decent coach they are delusional? I'm running out of lols here. Can only put 7 a post after all. So coach Neuheisl can win here, james and half a dozen other coaches before him can win championships here, but this HC you believe is going to take you to the promised land couldn't and we are the ones not using our heads? Wow dude, that's some great shit you are smoking there.


I know I already said it, but boy does this require a repeat here. He never took us to 8.5 wins. Now even if that number is somehow relevant, which it isn't for reasons already stated, your argument that he took us back there doesn't hold water. He never won more than 7 games in his 5 years here.

Damn those pesky facts!!! lol


And as we have said, you can keep on wishing all you want. Anything is possible and we have said as much. I mean some coaches learn from their mistakes, but so far to date Sark has had the worst teams in the conference in penalties, has never produced a top shelf defense, and every one of his offenses shot themselves in the foot in almost every big game they had. This isn't speculation or open to interpretation. It is a fair and fully established history of his head coaching career.

Now please do continue on this rant of yours. I love it when you come unglued and go all personal and raged out on this stuff.

Oh, and be sure to tell us again how much none of this means anything to you while you spend hours on a vitriolic rampage over it. Always a good read.

Lots of angry, repetitive rhetoric in here. What a waste of time. .

As for your opinion:

 

[WizardHawk]

not a shock considering so much of your vitriolic filled rant was rendered moot with those pesky facts I spoke of. I Would have predicted this would be roughly the time you would quit. I mean you kind of have to in order to try to appear disinterested. Your tirade betrays it, but it is still expected.

You may have decided to let it go for now, but we both know this isn't the end. You now have more time to work on your material to do better the next time you are easily goaded into a Sark discussion.

 

[trojanfan12]

not a shock considering so much of your vitriolic filled rant was rendered moot with those pesky facts I spoke of. I Would have predicted this would be roughly the time you would quit. I mean you kind of have to in order to try to appear disinterested. Your tirade betrays it, but it is still expected.

You may have decided to let it go for now, but we both know this isn't the end. You now have more time to work on your material to do better the next time you are easily goaded into a Sark discussion.

Nope not at all. Your post shows just how rustled your jimmies are. What's truly funny is that everyone see's it except you.

As for it not ending. As I've already told you: