A Q for the board..

MikeDamone

MikeDamone

Well-known poster
we know the Doog and Troojan line that when sark took over he inherited a bare cupboard. But he is such a great coach and recruiter he made them into a respectable team.

Since Sark is a great recruiter (everyone says so), is Petersen inheriting a stocked cupboard? Or the bigger question, did Petersen walk into a team with more raw talent that Sark? I think at some positions yes and others certainly not. I give the edge to Sark inheriting more talent than Petersen. I could be wrong, but given how bad willingham was and how supposedly great Sark was, this shouldn't even be a debatable topic.
 
I definitely think the top-to-bottom talent Peterman inherited is a bit better. But you fucking nailed it:

...given how bad willingham was and how supposedly great Sark was, this shouldn't even be a debatable topic...
Click to expand...

 
Sark went to a team stocked with 5 star offensive lineman in USC.

Peterman went to a team with barely enough 2 star offensive lineman to field a team.
 
Last edited:
Sark went to a team stocked with 5 star offensive lineman in USC.

Peterman went to a team with barely enough 2 star offensive lineman to field a team.
Click to expand...

You lack reading comprehension.
 
we know the Doog and Troojan line that when sark took over he inherited a bare cupboard. But he is such a great coach and recruiter he made them into a respectable team.

Since Sark is a great recruiter (everyone says so), is Petersen inheriting a stocked cupboard? Or the bigger question, did Petersen walk into a team with more raw talent that Sark? I think at some positions yes and others certainly not. I give the edge to Sark inheriting more talent than Petersen. I could be wrong, but given how bad willingham was and how supposedly great Sark was, this shouldn't even be a debatable topic.
Click to expand...

Stop plagiarism puppy's takes from three weeks ago Da Moan.
 
we know the Doog and Troojan line that when sark took over he inherited a bare cupboard. But he is such a great coach and recruiter he made them into a respectable team.

Since Sark is a great recruiter (everyone says so), is Petersen inheriting a stocked cupboard? Or the bigger question, did Petersen walk into a team with more raw talent that Sark? I think at some positions yes and others certainly not. I give the edge to Sark inheriting more talent than Petersen. I could be wrong, but given how bad willingham was and how supposedly great Sark was, this shouldn't even be a debatable topic.
Click to expand...

Stop plagiarism puppy's takes from three weeks ago Da Moan.
Click to expand...

I didn't see it. What was the consensus?
 
This team is more talented than what Sark inherited IMHO. But Sark had a huge advantage in Lockner.

As much as I hate Lockner, he was better from day 1 than Miley or Lindquist will ever be.

If Lockner was on this team it wouldn't be 10 wins it would final four playoffs or gtfo.
 
This team is more talented than what Sark inherited IMHO. But Sark had a huge advantage in Lockner.

As much as I hate Lockner, he was better from day 1 than Miley or Lindquist will ever be.

If Lockner was on this team it wouldn't be 10 wins it would final four playoffs or gtfo.
Click to expand...

Disagree. Lockner would still shit the bed two games a year.
 
You poasted a spreadsheet a few weeks ago that someone spoonfed you on another forum that showed Ty's NFL talent that Sark took credit for.

I will fucking guarantee that that list is 2:1 in favor of Ty in a few years.
 
This team is more talented than what Sark inherited IMHO. But Sark had a huge advantage in Lockner.

As much as I hate Lockner, he was better from day 1 than Miley or Lindquist will ever be.

If Lockner was on this team it wouldn't be 10 wins it would final four playoffs or gtfo.
Click to expand...

Even without a top tier running back? Sark had locker and Polk.
 
Since I have no life maybe tomorrow I'll do a position by position breakdown. I'd do it now but I'm drinking. Better to do it during work hours.

Again, the fact that this is even a topic is astonishing.
 
Last edited:
This team is more talented than what Sark inherited IMHO. But Sark had a huge advantage in Lockner.

As much as I hate Lockner, he was better from day 1 than Miley or Lindquist will ever be.

If Lockner was on this team it wouldn't be 10 wins it would final four playoffs or gtfo.
Click to expand...

Disagree. Lockner would still shit the bed two games a year.
Click to expand...

If he lost 2 games because Jack shit the bed I'd be willing to AuburnDoog my expectations. He is a complete fucking loser so you're probably right.
 
Even without a top tier running back? Sark had locker and Polk.
Click to expand...

Washington and Coleman will never be Polk/Sankey level backs. But they're good enough to win with. They certainly weren't the problem yesterday.
 
Here is the 2009 starting O. Who to you trade out for yesterday's starting offense?

Locker
Polk
Aguilar
Schaefer/Ossi (lol)
Christine/Wood
Kelemete
Habban
Middleton
Johnson
Kearse.

 
It's really strange to say this, but outside of Stringfellow's half year and Kasen, WIllingham's receivers were a lot better. Defensive talent is miles (lol) ahead right now at the top end (Shelton, Shaq, Peters), but the middle and bottom are not any better (Scott Lawyer, Evan Hudson, wtf?).
 
2009 defense. Who do you replace with yesterday's starters?
Te’o-Nesheim
Ta’amu
Elisara
Jones
Savannah
Butler
Foster
Aiyewa
Fellner
Trufant
Richardson
 
Even without a top tier running back? Sark had locker and Polk.
Click to expand...

Washington and Coleman will never be Polk/Sankey level backs. But they're good enough to win with. They certainly weren't the problem yesterday.
Click to expand...

Polk and Sankey were two of the best backs in UW history. Even with shitty lines. They gave the offense something defenses had to always fear and respect. Coleman and Washington types are on the two and three deeps of every team in the pac 12.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top