Another Stellar Incoming OLine Class

[greenblood]

Cozzetto sucks, and it's not even a debate. The last good OL he coached was at ASU in the late 90's. High school recruits were infants and toddlers the last time Cozzetto coached a good OL. That's not an opinion, that's a fact. Having said that, he is not the reason we don't get good OL recruits, Sark is.

Of course, Sark would like to get good OL recruits, but is there any doubt he enjoys recruiting a good QB or WR more than the OL? Don't you think we would have more good OL if Sark personally recruited them and made them know how badly we needed them? Instead, he pawns off the in state guys from 2012 on Cox who fucks it up, and becomes the scapegoat for who is actually responsible for fucking up, the guy in charge, Sark.

Very true. The writing is on the wall.

As SouthernDawg notes, I am big proponent of coaching stability, and against the "coaching carousel" mentality. Coaching stability was a factor in DJ's success, and more recently in Oregon's success. But it depends on having good coaches in place to begin with. In response to SouthernDawg, it is true that for years I have argued in favor of coaching stability, and that lead to me being supportive of coaches who did not deserve support. What i have said also is that (as in the case of Sark and as became the case with Willingham), they should be judged by teams composed of their own recruits who have been coached through their system. I know that there are times when a new coach will have success with the previous team's recruits, but the measure of whether a coach is suitable for longer term -- i.e., whether he can be the guy for coaching stability -- is how his teams do in year's 4-5 when his recruits become upperclassmen trained in his system. I was wrong to support a last year for Willingham, and I said so at the time, but I did support him for the reasons I state above. I should have discarded those reasons, but I did not in favor of stability.

I have learned from that experience, and in fact have been critical of Sark from the time of his hiring. His failure to fire Cozzetto last year was the last straw for me, so Sark deserves firing. Not only because of Cozzetto, but because of play calling, recruiting that does not build the core of the team (OL and DL), weak attitudes across the team, and the obvious: three 7-6 records. The first two were more understandable considering the schedules we inherited. The 2012 season was a mess from the beginning. I could see it in the spring practices of 2012 and again in fall practice, and in the opening game against San Diego State, the wheels went off the Husky team after the first two series. They never came back on, even though we had an amazing win against Stanford that somehow blurred the issues once again.

Sark should have been fired after the Apple Cup last year.

If you want stability, the option is obvious. Promote Wilcox and keep the D coaches on board. Keisau coached with Wilcox and Tosh at Cal. Jim Michalzek was the OL coach at Cal at the time. I'm sure you could pull him away from Arizona. Then all you really need is to hire a new OC. Out- Sark, Nansen, Cozetto. In-Michalzek, & new OC. This staff would be able to make huge inroads in the bay area. With Sark & Nansen's frat-boy mentality gone, you'd be able to rebuild in state behind Sirmon. Go out and get the best OC available. Almost any OC would be an upgrade over Sark.

Whatever the case, the sooner Sark is gone the better.

Let's hire Wilcox as head coach. Cause hiring first time head coaches with no head coaching offers worked so well with Sark.

Trying to equate hiring Wilcox with Sark is one of the stupidest things I've ever heard on this bored. Yeah...the 2 are the same...Except for the fact that Wilcox has improved defenses at three different schools and worked with mediocre and marginal talent while Sark was an OC for 2 years working with 5* talent.

The dude's defense got prison raped by Oregon and blew an 18 point lead in the Apple Cup.

Clearly he deserves a promotion.

You missed the part where I said "If you want stability..."

You can pick out a few negative points for anyone. Hell Mora's defense gave up 28+ points 8 fucking times last year including 43 to Cal, 49 to Baylor, 36 to WSU. They fortunately missed Oregon.

Tim DeRuyter's D gave up 40 to San Diego St, 42 to Oregon, and 36 to Nevada.

If you want stability with this coaching staff, you deserve to die in a fucking fire.

Mora's defense was good enough to beat its rival and win its division of the Pac-12.

As for Tim DeRuyter, I don't give a fuck.

Duck fans love Sark and his staff.

If your rival loves your head coach and staff, then you need a new head coach and staff. I think we're done here.

 

[[Deleted User]]

Cozzetto sucks, and it's not even a debate. The last good OL he coached was at ASU in the late 90's. High school recruits were infants and toddlers the last time Cozzetto coached a good OL. That's not an opinion, that's a fact. Having said that, he is not the reason we don't get good OL recruits, Sark is.

Of course, Sark would like to get good OL recruits, but is there any doubt he enjoys recruiting a good QB or WR more than the OL? Don't you think we would have more good OL if Sark personally recruited them and made them know how badly we needed them? Instead, he pawns off the in state guys from 2012 on Cox who fucks it up, and becomes the scapegoat for who is actually responsible for fucking up, the guy in charge, Sark.

Very true. The writing is on the wall.

As SouthernDawg notes, I am big proponent of coaching stability, and against the "coaching carousel" mentality. Coaching stability was a factor in DJ's success, and more recently in Oregon's success. But it depends on having good coaches in place to begin with. In response to SouthernDawg, it is true that for years I have argued in favor of coaching stability, and that lead to me being supportive of coaches who did not deserve support. What i have said also is that (as in the case of Sark and as became the case with Willingham), they should be judged by teams composed of their own recruits who have been coached through their system. I know that there are times when a new coach will have success with the previous team's recruits, but the measure of whether a coach is suitable for longer term -- i.e., whether he can be the guy for coaching stability -- is how his teams do in year's 4-5 when his recruits become upperclassmen trained in his system. I was wrong to support a last year for Willingham, and I said so at the time, but I did support him for the reasons I state above. I should have discarded those reasons, but I did not in favor of stability.

I have learned from that experience, and in fact have been critical of Sark from the time of his hiring. His failure to fire Cozzetto last year was the last straw for me, so Sark deserves firing. Not only because of Cozzetto, but because of play calling, recruiting that does not build the core of the team (OL and DL), weak attitudes across the team, and the obvious: three 7-6 records. The first two were more understandable considering the schedules we inherited. The 2012 season was a mess from the beginning. I could see it in the spring practices of 2012 and again in fall practice, and in the opening game against San Diego State, the wheels went off the Husky team after the first two series. They never came back on, even though we had an amazing win against Stanford that somehow blurred the issues once again.

Sark should have been fired after the Apple Cup last year.

If you want stability, the option is obvious. Promote Wilcox and keep the D coaches on board. Keisau coached with Wilcox and Tosh at Cal. Jim Michalzek was the OL coach at Cal at the time. I'm sure you could pull him away from Arizona. Then all you really need is to hire a new OC. Out- Sark, Nansen, Cozetto. In-Michalzek, & new OC. This staff would be able to make huge inroads in the bay area. With Sark & Nansen's frat-boy mentality gone, you'd be able to rebuild in state behind Sirmon. Go out and get the best OC available. Almost any OC would be an upgrade over Sark.

Whatever the case, the sooner Sark is gone the better.

Let's hire Wilcox as head coach. Cause hiring first time head coaches with no head coaching offers worked so well with Sark.

I'm pretty sure that after an exhaustive and unrealistic (Nick Saban, Urban Meyer) nation wide coaching search Woody will announce just that. Maybe Wilcox will work out, he's at least smart enough to realize the defensive players aren't all that great and change the scheme but in the end I feel like that as a HC he's just another Sark minus Erin Andrews and Joey's waitresses. Allegedly.

I'm not big on Wilcox like everyone else. If he was a great DC/future HC material he doesn't give up 50+ TWICE and blow an 18 point lead. Not to mention giving up 41 points to a not so great LSU offense.

He had the worst defense in the SEC as well and was about to get shit canned along with the rest of that staff had he stayed. That's why he was so quick to leave.

He's a solid DC but he's not a DC that is so great I'm afraid of losing him or we must promote him as HC before he is stolen(like Chip Kelly was as an OC).

 

[[Deleted User]]

Cozzetto sucks, and it's not even a debate. The last good OL he coached was at ASU in the late 90's. High school recruits were infants and toddlers the last time Cozzetto coached a good OL. That's not an opinion, that's a fact. Having said that, he is not the reason we don't get good OL recruits, Sark is.

Of course, Sark would like to get good OL recruits, but is there any doubt he enjoys recruiting a good QB or WR more than the OL? Don't you think we would have more good OL if Sark personally recruited them and made them know how badly we needed them? Instead, he pawns off the in state guys from 2012 on Cox who fucks it up, and becomes the scapegoat for who is actually responsible for fucking up, the guy in charge, Sark.

Very true. The writing is on the wall.

As SouthernDawg notes, I am big proponent of coaching stability, and against the "coaching carousel" mentality. Coaching stability was a factor in DJ's success, and more recently in Oregon's success. But it depends on having good coaches in place to begin with. In response to SouthernDawg, it is true that for years I have argued in favor of coaching stability, and that lead to me being supportive of coaches who did not deserve support. What i have said also is that (as in the case of Sark and as became the case with Willingham), they should be judged by teams composed of their own recruits who have been coached through their system. I know that there are times when a new coach will have success with the previous team's recruits, but the measure of whether a coach is suitable for longer term -- i.e., whether he can be the guy for coaching stability -- is how his teams do in year's 4-5 when his recruits become upperclassmen trained in his system. I was wrong to support a last year for Willingham, and I said so at the time, but I did support him for the reasons I state above. I should have discarded those reasons, but I did not in favor of stability.

I have learned from that experience, and in fact have been critical of Sark from the time of his hiring. His failure to fire Cozzetto last year was the last straw for me, so Sark deserves firing. Not only because of Cozzetto, but because of play calling, recruiting that does not build the core of the team (OL and DL), weak attitudes across the team, and the obvious: three 7-6 records. The first two were more understandable considering the schedules we inherited. The 2012 season was a mess from the beginning. I could see it in the spring practices of 2012 and again in fall practice, and in the opening game against San Diego State, the wheels went off the Husky team after the first two series. They never came back on, even though we had an amazing win against Stanford that somehow blurred the issues once again.

Sark should have been fired after the Apple Cup last year.

If you want stability, the option is obvious. Promote Wilcox and keep the D coaches on board. Keisau coached with Wilcox and Tosh at Cal. Jim Michalzek was the OL coach at Cal at the time. I'm sure you could pull him away from Arizona. Then all you really need is to hire a new OC. Out- Sark, Nansen, Cozetto. In-Michalzek, & new OC. This staff would be able to make huge inroads in the bay area. With Sark & Nansen's frat-boy mentality gone, you'd be able to rebuild in state behind Sirmon. Go out and get the best OC available. Almost any OC would be an upgrade over Sark.

Whatever the case, the sooner Sark is gone the better.

Let's hire Wilcox as head coach. Cause hiring first time head coaches with no head coaching offers worked so well with Sark.

Trying to equate hiring Wilcox with Sark is one of the stupidest things I've ever heard on this bored. Yeah...the 2 are the same...Except for the fact that Wilcox has improved defenses at three different schools and worked with mediocre and marginal talent while Sark was an OC for 2 years working with 5* talent.

The stupidest things you've ever heard on this board huh? Says the guy who thinks PLSS is actually a good poster.

Wilcox had the worst defenses in the SEC while he was there. He did well at Boise but the myth is Boise doesn't have talent. Sure among the big boys they don't but Boise has a huge talent gap over their opponents in conference in recruiting. When they play those big games it's typically first game of the year or a bowl game so they have plenty of time to prepare. He also had a great head coach in Chris Peterson.

Only one big Boise win was cause of the defense in the Wilcox era which was the Blount punch game.

At Tennessee he sucked. They had the worst defense in the SEC and had he stayed another year there he was going to get fired.

Not one team considered him to be a head coach. Like I said he's a solid DC but he's not so good that I'd want to hire him as a HC.

If and when UW fires Sark they have to get an established head coach you can't make the same mistake again. I'd say the fact you still don't get it with Sark, our assistants is pretty damning for yourself.

 

[HeretoBeatmyChest]

We can agree to disagree, at least you can make some cogent points.

You are one of the few who now disagrees that puppy is a good poster.

Wilcox improved the D at Tennessee who wasn't very good at the time. Their national rankings went up while he was there and then the D got much worse when he left. Texas wanted him. Google it.

The UW D improved about 70 spots in the first year. Combine that with the strong recruiting led by Tosh and Sirmon and you have a recipe for a top 10 defense. Even Sventard admitted it would be top 20 which is earth-shattering for a guy who lives on 0-12 and lemon party and nothing else. Several players under Tosh went to the NFL, Sirmon is a big-time recruiter and LB play improved greatly and Heyward is also good. Its a very good defensive staff and anyone who can't admit that should be placed in a lemon party with Ecklund & Fetters and simultaneously lit on fire.

If Mora were anyone else, most here would point out the mediocre defense, easy schedule (no Oregon) and shellacking to a mediocre team in the bowl game. UCLA without Fauria and Franklin could take a step back on offense and we'll see how good the defense is in year 2.

Not saying Wilcox should be promoted yet....you basically have 3 candidates...Mora, DeRuyter and Wilcox. This year will give you more of a sample on all of them. DeRuyter has done enough already to be hired.

 

[Global]

OL is low priority for Sark even though he would never admit it. And fundamentally he made his first mistake by hiring Dan Cozzetto when his first choice from Cal reversed and turned Sark down. Cozzetto is a mean-spirited screamer who cannot teach. None of these talented OL prospects want to play for him, since word of his style has got out. Of course other teams use Cozzetto against us in recruiting. But Sark has kept Cozzetto despite the most inept years of OL recruiting and development in UW football history.
Unacceptable.

Did you watch Cozz's Oline last year? By the way, Sean Harlow looks really good at OSU. HUGE FUCKING loss for Sark. Worse than the skinny bball player, unless your Sark

Yes, indeed. I watched the OL development in spring camp last year, and already knew 2012 would be a mess from that experience. The OL would have been bad even without injuries, but once the injuries continues, plus Porter's retirement, it spun out of control.
And on recruiting, the list of good in state OL recruits who signed elsewhere is sickening. I sort of understand when a top OL kid from anywhere signs at Stanford, just because of the outstanding eduction and network Stanford offers, and if a kid is smart enough to get in, then 99 times out of 100 it is smart for him to do so. But leaving out Stanford, the list of kids signed elsewhere is a huge indictment on Sark and Cozzetto.

 

[TierbsHsotBoobs]

We can agree to disagree, at least you can make some cogent points.

You are one of the few who now disagrees that puppy is a good poster.

Wilcox improved the D at Tennessee who wasn't very good at the time. Their national rankings went up while he was there and then the D got much worse when he left. Texas wanted him. Google it.

The UW D improved about 70 spots in the first year. Combine that with the strong recruiting led by Tosh and Sirmon and you have a recipe for a top 10 defense. Even Sventard admitted it would be top 20 which is earth-shattering for a guy who lives on 0-12 and lemon party and nothing else. Several players under Tosh went to the NFL, Sirmon is a big-time recruiter and LB play improved greatly and Heyward is also good. Its a very good defensive staff and anyone who can't admit that should be placed in a lemon party with Ecklund & Fetters and simultaneously lit on fire.

If Mora were anyone else, most here would point out the mediocre defense, easy schedule (no Oregon) and shellacking to a mediocre team in the bowl game. UCLA without Fauria and Franklin could take a step back on offense and we'll see how good the defense is in year 2.

Not saying Wilcox should be promoted yet....you basically have 3 candidates...Mora, DeRuyter and Wilcox. This year will give you more of a sample on all of them. DeRuyter has done enough already to be hired.

Your life is sorely lacking abundance.

 

[RoadDawg55]

Cozzetto sucks, and it's not even a debate. The last good OL he coached was at ASU in the late 90's. High school recruits were infants and toddlers the last time Cozzetto coached a good OL. That's not an opinion, that's a fact. Having said that, he is not the reason we don't get good OL recruits, Sark is.

Of course, Sark would like to get good OL recruits, but is there any doubt he enjoys recruiting a good QB or WR more than the OL? Don't you think we would have more good OL if Sark personally recruited them and made them know how badly we needed them? Instead, he pawns off the in state guys from 2012 on Cox who fucks it up, and becomes the scapegoat for who is actually responsible for fucking up, the guy in charge, Sark.

Very true. The writing is on the wall.

As SouthernDawg notes, I am big proponent of coaching stability, and against the "coaching carousel" mentality. Coaching stability was a factor in DJ's success, and more recently in Oregon's success. But it depends on having good coaches in place to begin with. In response to SouthernDawg, it is true that for years I have argued in favor of coaching stability, and that lead to me being supportive of coaches who did not deserve support. What i have said also is that (as in the case of Sark and as became the case with Willingham), they should be judged by teams composed of their own recruits who have been coached through their system. I know that there are times when a new coach will have success with the pruevious team's recruits, but the measure of whether a coach is suitable for longer term -- i.e., whether he can be the guy for coaching stability -- is how his teams do in year's 4-5 when his recruits become upperclassmen trained in his system. I was wrong to support a last year for Willingham, and I said so at the time, but I did support him for the reasons I state above. I should have discarded those reasons, but I did not in favor of stability.

I have learned from that experience, and in fact have been critical of Sark from the time of his hiring. His failure to fire Cozzetto last year was the last straw for me, so Sark deserves firing. Not only because of Cozzetto, but because of play calling, recruiting that does not build the core of the team (OL and DL), weak attitudes across the team, and the obvious: three 7-6 records. The first two were more understandable considering the schedules we inherited. The 2012 season was a mess from the beginning. I could see it in the spring practices of 2012 and again in fall practice, and in the opening game against San Diego State, the wheels went off the Husky team after the first two series. They never came back on, even though we had an amazing win against Stanford that somehow blurred the issues once again.

Sark should have been fired after the Apple Cup last year.

If you want stability, the option is obvious. Promote Wilcox and keep the D coaches on board. Keisau coached with Wilcox and Tosh at Cal. Jim Michalzek was the OL coach at Cal at the time. I'm sure you could pull him away from Arizona. Then all you really need is to hire a new OC. Out- Sark, Nansen, Cozetto. In-Michalzek, & new OC. This staff would be able to make huge inroads in the bay area. With Sark & Nansen's frat-boy mentality gone, you'd be able to rebuild in state behind Sirmon. Go out and get the best OC available. Almost any OC would be an upgrade over Sark.

Whatever the case, the sooner Sark is gone the better.

Let's hire Wilcox as head coach. Cause hiring first time head coaches with no head coaching offers worked so well with Sark.

Trying to equate hiring Wilcox with Sark is one of the stupidest things I've ever heard on this bored. Yeah...the 2 are the same...Except for the fact that Wilcox has improved defenses at three different schools and worked with mediocre and marginal talent while Sark was an OC for 2 years working with 5* talent.

The stupidest things you've ever heard on this board huh? Says the guy who thinks PLSS is actually a good poster.

Wilcox had the worst defenses in the SEC while he was there. He did well at Boise but the myth is Boise doesn't have talent. Sure among the big boys they don't but Boise has a huge talent gap over their opponents in conference in recruiting. When they play those big games it's typically first game of the year or a bowl game so they have plenty of time to prepare. He also had a great head coach in Chris Peterson.

Only one big Boise win was cause of the defense in the Wilcox era which was the Blount punch game.

At Tennessee he sucked. They had the worst defense in the SEC and had he stayed another year there he was going to get fired.

Not one team considered him to be a head coach. Like I said he's a solid DC but he's not so good that I'd want to hire him as a HC.

If and when UW fires Sark they have to get an established head coach you can't make the same mistake again. I'd say the fact you still don't get it with Sark, our assistants is pretty damning for yourself.

Horrible post. You did a great job making shit up. Wilcox did not have the worst defense in the SEC during his time there. In fact, from year one to year two, Tennessee made a big improvement. What happened last year without Wilcox? Oh yeah, Tennessee did actually have the worst defense in the SEC. If you look at all of the evidence, I would say Wilcox actually did a good job at Tennessee. Not great, but good. Take a look for yourself.
http://sports.yahoo.com/ncaa/footba...=Total&sort=1137&conference=I-A_SEC&year=2011

I agree with you guys that the Apple Cup and the Arizona game were bad, but was it realistic to expect a dominant defense? You gotta look at the big picture, which is we made a pretty fucking big improvement with Wilcox. We should expect more improvement this year. He's proven to be a good defensive coordinator at three stops.

I don't think Wilcox should be our next coach. Even the best coordinators are iffy hires, and we can't afford that. I like Wilcox and the defensive staff, but I don't like them enough to justify passing over a proven head coach just so we can keep them. We would be much better off hiring a proven coach like Mora or Petrino. The Fresno State guy is another guy to keep an eye on.

 

[IrishDawg22]

@RoadDawg

Nice...I was just going to call that out. He actually improved the D from year 1 to 2. And what people do not take into consideration is that the Vols offense was horrid both years leaving that D out on the field against those massive SEC Olines.

And the year after he left they dropped to dead last.

Facts can get in the way of a good argument.

Not saying he is head coach material, but I think he has potential to be a very good D cord. Now if he can figure out the damn spread.

 

[[Deleted User]]

Wilcox is not head coach material. Harv was right about you guys and you can't seem to hide your inner doog.

Wilcox in 2011 at Tennessee saw his defense ranked 8th in the SEC in points allowed. I guess that's head coach material guys. He was 7th in the SEC in yards.

Also in 2009 Tennessee allowed 308.8 yards per game which was ranked 4th in the SEC, then Wilcox arrived and they allowed 381.9 and was ranked 10th in the SEC.

In 2009 Tennessee allowed 21 points per game which was good for 6th in the SEC. In 2010 Wilcox allowed 24.7 PPG which was good for 9th in the SEC.

So I guess I should add this to the Doog myth of "Wilcox improves defenses everywhere he goes" because in reality they took a step back.

 

[IrishDawg22]

Wilcox is not head coach material. Harv was right about you guys and you can't seem to hide your inner doog.

Wilcox in 2011 at Tennessee saw his defense ranked 8th in the SEC in points allowed. I guess that's head coach material guys. He was 7th in the SEC in yards.

Also in 2009 Tennessee allowed 308.8 yards per game which was ranked 4th in the SEC, then Wilcox arrived and they allowed 381.9 and was ranked 10th in the SEC.

In 2009 Tennessee allowed 21 points per game which was good for 6th in the SEC. In 2010 Wilcox allowed 24.7 PPG which was good for 9th in the SEC.

So I guess I should add this to the Doog myth of "Wilcox improves defenses everywhere he goes" because in reality they took a step back.

Maybe I need to start typing SLLLLLOOOOOOOWWWWWWEEEEEERRRRR for you. You must have missed the part about "not saying he is head coach material".

And I love how your facts are incorrect, so you scramble back and try and save your argument.

So let me get this straight, Wilcox sucks, but DeRuyter's team gives up 42 points to freakin' SMU in their bowl game and he is already good to go.

You are such a Noog.

 

[[Deleted User]]

Wilcox is not head coach material. Harv was right about you guys and you can't seem to hide your inner doog.

Wilcox in 2011 at Tennessee saw his defense ranked 8th in the SEC in points allowed. I guess that's head coach material guys. He was 7th in the SEC in yards.

Also in 2009 Tennessee allowed 308.8 yards per game which was ranked 4th in the SEC, then Wilcox arrived and they allowed 381.9 and was ranked 10th in the SEC.

In 2009 Tennessee allowed 21 points per game which was good for 6th in the SEC. In 2010 Wilcox allowed 24.7 PPG which was good for 9th in the SEC.

So I guess I should add this to the Doog myth of "Wilcox improves defenses everywhere he goes" because in reality they took a step back.

Maybe I need to start typing SLLLLLOOOOOOOWWWWWWEEEEEERRRRR for you. You must have missed the part about "not saying he is head coach material".

And I love how your facts are incorrect, so you scramble back and try and save your argument.

So let me get this straight, Wilcox sucks, but DeRuyter's team gives up 42 points to freakin' SMU in their bowl game and he is already good to go.

You are such a Noog.

I wasn't responding to you as I generally don't waste my time with your posts. Beatmychest and Road Doog seem to think Wilcox is head coach material.

As for DeRuyter he's produced an 11th ranked defense in the nation with Air Force and as a head coach won 9 games.

I'd say I'm open to hiring him especially if he has another 9-10 win season. If UW doesn't some big program will.

As for Wilcox despite some moron lying saying Texas interviewed him for being a head coach nobody has contacted Wilcox to be a head coach.

I've said before I think Wilcox is a fine DC but he's not so good where I fear about losing him.

 

[RoadDawg55]

Wilcox is not head coach material. Harv was right about you guys and you can't seem to hide your inner doog.

Wilcox in 2011 at Tennessee saw his defense ranked 8th in the SEC in points allowed. I guess that's head coach material guys. He was 7th in the SEC in yards.

Also in 2009 Tennessee allowed 308.8 yards per game which was ranked 4th in the SEC, then Wilcox arrived and they allowed 381.9 and was ranked 10th in the SEC.

In 2009 Tennessee allowed 21 points per game which was good for 6th in the SEC. In 2010 Wilcox allowed 24.7 PPG which was good for 9th in the SEC.

So I guess I should add this to the Doog myth of "Wilcox improves defenses everywhere he goes" because in reality they took a step back.

Well Tennessee did lose Eric Berry and Dan Williams (DT, another first round pick) from their defense after the 2009 season. Call me crazy, but when you lose a Jim Thorpe winner and another first rounder, it hurts your defense. Does pointing that out make me a doog as well?

You love to call anyone a doog if they disagree with you. Your post earlier was shit, and you got rightfully called out for it. You specifically said Wilcox's defenses were the worst in the SEC, which was fabricated bullshit.

You have no fucking clue if Wilcox is head coach material or not. Nobody does considering he has never been a head coach. Please show me where I said we should hire Wilcox. The only thing I said is that he has proven to be a good DC. Your post is yeah, but still Section 14A level stupid. Do some fucking research and don't make shit up if you don't want to be called out for your bullshit. If that is too hard, there's always the doog insult.

 

[RoadDawg55]

Wilcox is not head coach material. Harv was right about you guys and you can't seem to hide your inner doog.

Wilcox in 2011 at Tennessee saw his defense ranked 8th in the SEC in points allowed. I guess that's head coach material guys. He was 7th in the SEC in yards.

Also in 2009 Tennessee allowed 308.8 yards per game which was ranked 4th in the SEC, then Wilcox arrived and they allowed 381.9 and was ranked 10th in the SEC.

In 2009 Tennessee allowed 21 points per game which was good for 6th in the SEC. In 2010 Wilcox allowed 24.7 PPG which was good for 9th in the SEC.

So I guess I should add this to the Doog myth of "Wilcox improves defenses everywhere he goes" because in reality they took a step back.

Maybe I need to start typing SLLLLLOOOOOOOWWWWWWEEEEEERRRRR for you. You must have missed the part about "not saying he is head coach material".

And I love how your facts are incorrect, so you scramble back and try and save your argument.

So let me get this straight, Wilcox sucks, but DeRuyter's team gives up 42 points to freakin' SMU in their bowl game and he is already good to go.

You are such a Noog.

I wasn't responding to you as I generally don't waste my time with your posts. Beatmychest and Road Doog seem to think Wilcox is head coach material.

As for DeRuyter he's produced an 11th ranked defense in the nation with Air Force and as a head coach won 9 games.

I'd say I'm open to hiring him especially if he has another 9-10 win season. If UW doesn't some big program will.

As for Wilcox despite some moron lying saying Texas interviewed him for being a head coach nobody has contacted Wilcox to be a head coach.

I've said before I think Wilcox is a fine DC but he's not so good where I fear about losing him.

You're pressing. I think you should go back over the posts and stop making shit up.

 

[[Deleted User]]

Wilcox is not head coach material. Harv was right about you guys and you can't seem to hide your inner doog.

Wilcox in 2011 at Tennessee saw his defense ranked 8th in the SEC in points allowed. I guess that's head coach material guys. He was 7th in the SEC in yards.

Also in 2009 Tennessee allowed 308.8 yards per game which was ranked 4th in the SEC, then Wilcox arrived and they allowed 381.9 and was ranked 10th in the SEC.

In 2009 Tennessee allowed 21 points per game which was good for 6th in the SEC. In 2010 Wilcox allowed 24.7 PPG which was good for 9th in the SEC.

So I guess I should add this to the Doog myth of "Wilcox improves defenses everywhere he goes" because in reality they took a step back.

Well Tennessee did lose Eric Berry and Dan Williams (DT, another first round pick) from their defense after the 2009 season. Call me crazy, but when you lose a Jim Thorpe winner and another first rounder, it hurts your defense. Does pointing that out make me a doog as well?

Typical Doog response. When called out on their bullshit that Wilcox "improved their defense" gotta make up excuses.

So I thought you said Wilcox improved them now you are making excuses for why he didn't improve them.

So was Holt excused for sucking in 2011 because he lost Foster?

 

[RoadDawg55]

Wilcox is not head coach material. Harv was right about you guys and you can't seem to hide your inner doog.

Wilcox in 2011 at Tennessee saw his defense ranked 8th in the SEC in points allowed. I guess that's head coach material guys. He was 7th in the SEC in yards.

Also in 2009 Tennessee allowed 308.8 yards per game which was ranked 4th in the SEC, then Wilcox arrived and they allowed 381.9 and was ranked 10th in the SEC.

In 2009 Tennessee allowed 21 points per game which was good for 6th in the SEC. In 2010 Wilcox allowed 24.7 PPG which was good for 9th in the SEC.

So I guess I should add this to the Doog myth of "Wilcox improves defenses everywhere he goes" because in reality they took a step back.

Well Tennessee did lose Eric Berry and Dan Williams (DT, another first round pick) from their defense after the 2009 season. Call me crazy, but when you lose a Jim Thorpe winner and another first rounder, it hurts your defense. Does pointing that out make me a doog as well?

Typical Doog response. When called out on their bullshit that Wilcox "improved their defense" gotta make up excuses.

So I thought you said Wilcox improved them now you are making excuses for why he didn't improve them.

So was Holt excused for sucking in 2011 because he lost Foster?

I'm not gonna keep arguing because no matter what I say, you won't change your mind. I normally like your posts, but you have gone Section14A today. Wilcox's first year wasn't great, but he improved the next year. Once he left and was replaced by Alabama's LB coach, Tennessee fell to last. They were also working for Derek Dooley who makes Sark look like Knute Rockne. He did good, but not great at Tennessee.

What would you call your shit about posting that Wilcox's d's were the worst in the SEC? I call it fabricated bullshit, but you can keep ignoring all of the retarded shit you posted and rely on doog. Like I said, when all else fails, revert to doog.

 

[[Deleted User]]

Wilcox is not head coach material. Harv was right about you guys and you can't seem to hide your inner doog.

Wilcox in 2011 at Tennessee saw his defense ranked 8th in the SEC in points allowed. I guess that's head coach material guys. He was 7th in the SEC in yards.

Also in 2009 Tennessee allowed 308.8 yards per game which was ranked 4th in the SEC, then Wilcox arrived and they allowed 381.9 and was ranked 10th in the SEC.

In 2009 Tennessee allowed 21 points per game which was good for 6th in the SEC. In 2010 Wilcox allowed 24.7 PPG which was good for 9th in the SEC.

So I guess I should add this to the Doog myth of "Wilcox improves defenses everywhere he goes" because in reality they took a step back.

Well Tennessee did lose Eric Berry and Dan Williams (DT, another first round pick) from their defense after the 2009 season. Call me crazy, but when you lose a Jim Thorpe winner and another first rounder, it hurts your defense. Does pointing that out make me a doog as well?

Typical Doog response. When called out on their bullshit that Wilcox "improved their defense" gotta make up excuses.

So I thought you said Wilcox improved them now you are making excuses for why he didn't improve them.

So was Holt excused for sucking in 2011 because he lost Foster?

I'm not gonna keep arguing because no matter what I say, you won't change your mind. I normally like your posts, but you have gone Section14A today.

I've gone Section14AFS(his real name there dumbass) ? Umm disagree.

You and your podcast butt buddy($75,000) are the ones pumping up the newest doog myth of Wilcox. I bet you were all over the Holt hire and LOVED Sark in 2009 cause he's so much better than Ty.

You idiots even like PLSS and say he's a "good" poster.

 

[RoadDawg55]

Wilcox is not head coach material. Harv was right about you guys and you can't seem to hide your inner doog.

Wilcox in 2011 at Tennessee saw his defense ranked 8th in the SEC in points allowed. I guess that's head coach material guys. He was 7th in the SEC in yards.

Also in 2009 Tennessee allowed 308.8 yards per game which was ranked 4th in the SEC, then Wilcox arrived and they allowed 381.9 and was ranked 10th in the SEC.

In 2009 Tennessee allowed 21 points per game which was good for 6th in the SEC. In 2010 Wilcox allowed 24.7 PPG which was good for 9th in the SEC.

So I guess I should add this to the Doog myth of "Wilcox improves defenses everywhere he goes" because in reality they took a step back.

Well Tennessee did lose Eric Berry and Dan Williams (DT, another first round pick) from their defense after the 2009 season. Call me crazy, but when you lose a Jim Thorpe winner and another first rounder, it hurts your defense. Does pointing that out make me a doog as well?

Typical Doog response. When called out on their bullshit that Wilcox "improved their defense" gotta make up excuses.

So I thought you said Wilcox improved them now you are making excuses for why he didn't improve them.

So was Holt excused for sucking in 2011 because he lost Foster?

I'm not gonna keep arguing because no matter what I say, you won't change your mind. I normally like your posts, but you have gone Section14A today.

I've gone Section14AFS(his real name there dumbass) ? Umm disagree.

You and your podcast butt buddy($75,000) are the ones pumping up the newest doog myth of Wilcox. I bet you were all over the Holt hire and LOVED Sark in 2009 cause he's so much better than Ty.

You idiots even like PLSS and say he's a "good" poster.

I haven't said anything except I like Wilcox and he is a proven DC. Nowhere did I say he should be the next coach. You keep making shit up that I never said. This whole thread, you have just twisted and made up because you posted some Section14A level shit.

PLSS really let me down today. He mixed up his meds, so don't be so hard on the guy. He will bounce back.

 

[[Deleted User]]

Wilcox is not head coach material. Harv was right about you guys and you can't seem to hide your inner doog.

Wilcox in 2011 at Tennessee saw his defense ranked 8th in the SEC in points allowed. I guess that's head coach material guys. He was 7th in the SEC in yards.

Also in 2009 Tennessee allowed 308.8 yards per game which was ranked 4th in the SEC, then Wilcox arrived and they allowed 381.9 and was ranked 10th in the SEC.

In 2009 Tennessee allowed 21 points per game which was good for 6th in the SEC. In 2010 Wilcox allowed 24.7 PPG which was good for 9th in the SEC.

So I guess I should add this to the Doog myth of "Wilcox improves defenses everywhere he goes" because in reality they took a step back.

Well Tennessee did lose Eric Berry and Dan Williams (DT, another first round pick) from their defense after the 2009 season. Call me crazy, but when you lose a Jim Thorpe winner and another first rounder, it hurts your defense. Does pointing that out make me a doog as well?

Typical Doog response. When called out on their bullshit that Wilcox "improved their defense" gotta make up excuses.

So I thought you said Wilcox improved them now you are making excuses for why he didn't improve them.

So was Holt excused for sucking in 2011 because he lost Foster?

I'm not gonna keep arguing because no matter what I say, you won't change your mind. I normally like your posts, but you have gone Section14A today.

I've gone Section14AFS(his real name there dumbass) ? Umm disagree.

You and your podcast butt buddy($75,000) are the ones pumping up the newest doog myth of Wilcox. I bet you were all over the Holt hire and LOVED Sark in 2009 cause he's so much better than Ty.

You idiots even like PLSS and say he's a "good" poster.

I haven't said anything except I like Wilcox and he is a proven DC. Nowhere did I say he should be the next coach. You keep making shit up that I never said. This whole thread, you have just twisted and made up because you posted some Section14A level shit.

PLSS really let me down today. He mixed up his meds, so don't be so hard on the guy. He will bounce back.

You're Boobs or Harv. Shit is stupid, but have fun buddy.

 

[RoadDawg55]

Wilcox is not head coach material. Harv was right about you guys and you can't seem to hide your inner doog.

Wilcox in 2011 at Tennessee saw his defense ranked 8th in the SEC in points allowed. I guess that's head coach material guys. He was 7th in the SEC in yards.

Also in 2009 Tennessee allowed 308.8 yards per game which was ranked 4th in the SEC, then Wilcox arrived and they allowed 381.9 and was ranked 10th in the SEC.

In 2009 Tennessee allowed 21 points per game which was good for 6th in the SEC. In 2010 Wilcox allowed 24.7 PPG which was good for 9th in the SEC.

So I guess I should add this to the Doog myth of "Wilcox improves defenses everywhere he goes" because in reality they took a step back.

Well Tennessee did lose Eric Berry and Dan Williams (DT, another first round pick) from their defense after the 2009 season. Call me crazy, but when you lose a Jim Thorpe winner and another first rounder, it hurts your defense. Does pointing that out make me a doog as well?

Typical Doog response. When called out on their bullshit that Wilcox "improved their defense" gotta make up excuses.

So I thought you said Wilcox improved them now you are making excuses for why he didn't improve them.

So was Holt excused for sucking in 2011 because he lost Foster?

I'm not gonna keep arguing because no matter what I say, you won't change your mind. I normally like your posts, but you have gone Section14A today.

I've gone Section14AFS(his real name there dumbass) ? Umm disagree.

You and your podcast butt buddy($75,000) are the ones pumping up the newest doog myth of Wilcox. I bet you were all over the Holt hire and LOVED Sark in 2009 cause he's so much better than Ty.

You idiots even like PLSS and say he's a "good" poster.

I haven't said anything except I like Wilcox and he is a proven DC. Nowhere did I say he should be the next coach. You keep making shit up that I never said. This whole thread, you have just twisted and made up because you posted some Section14A level shit.

PLSS really let me down today. He mixed up his meds, so don't be so hard on the guy. He will bounce back.

You're Boobs or Harv. Shit is stupid, but have fun buddy.

Quit being a little bitch because you got called out for bullshit posts.

 

[[Deleted User]]

Wilcox is not head coach material. Harv was right about you guys and you can't seem to hide your inner doog.

Wilcox in 2011 at Tennessee saw his defense ranked 8th in the SEC in points allowed. I guess that's head coach material guys. He was 7th in the SEC in yards.

Also in 2009 Tennessee allowed 308.8 yards per game which was ranked 4th in the SEC, then Wilcox arrived and they allowed 381.9 and was ranked 10th in the SEC.

In 2009 Tennessee allowed 21 points per game which was good for 6th in the SEC. In 2010 Wilcox allowed 24.7 PPG which was good for 9th in the SEC.

So I guess I should add this to the Doog myth of "Wilcox improves defenses everywhere he goes" because in reality they took a step back.

Well Tennessee did lose Eric Berry and Dan Williams (DT, another first round pick) from their defense after the 2009 season. Call me crazy, but when you lose a Jim Thorpe winner and another first rounder, it hurts your defense. Does pointing that out make me a doog as well?

Typical Doog response. When called out on their bullshit that Wilcox "improved their defense" gotta make up excuses.

So I thought you said Wilcox improved them now you are making excuses for why he didn't improve them.

So was Holt excused for sucking in 2011 because he lost Foster?

I'm not gonna keep arguing because no matter what I say, you won't change your mind. I normally like your posts, but you have gone Section14A today.

I've gone Section14AFS(his real name there dumbass) ? Umm disagree.

You and your podcast butt buddy($75,000) are the ones pumping up the newest doog myth of Wilcox. I bet you were all over the Holt hire and LOVED Sark in 2009 cause he's so much better than Ty.

You idiots even like PLSS and say he's a "good" poster.

I haven't said anything except I like Wilcox and he is a proven DC. Nowhere did I say he should be the next coach. You keep making shit up that I never said. This whole thread, you have just twisted and made up because you posted some Section14A level shit.

PLSS really let me down today. He mixed up his meds, so don't be so hard on the guy. He will bounce back.

You're Boobs or Harv. Shit is stupid, but have fun buddy.

Quit being a little bitch because you got called out for bullshit posts.

Are you going to start pressing badly like you did during that thread?

I CORRECTLY pointed out that Wilcox didn't improve the defense at Tennessee like you claimed. Then you used a doog like excuse "But he lost this player and this player you can't possibly expect him to improve".