Chris Petersen continues to shatter doogFS myths

The fact they won nine games and had to deal with 7 less feet in elevation....you guys are lucky Sark even coached here at all.
 
I'm an opening kickoff, on a crisp Hawaiian afternoon, away from going fully slappy ass Doog & NOGAF. Bleet for Pete, bitches.
 
Last edited:
Met a couple of the players recently. One of them said they just couldn't really "buy in" with Sark and said the change with the coaching staff has been fantastic.
Click to expand...

Meh. This is just classic confirmation bias. It's telling because we want it to be telling. But these exact comments are made by players every single time there's a regime change. Sometimes they're telling, sometimes they're not. Time will tell.

Either way it will be interesting.
 
What will be interesting will be the reaction from many at the other site if Peterson does win 11 games and Sark falls flat in some very winnable games as he did here and USC has a less than stellar season. My guess is that there would be the normal enabling excuses having to do with sanctions and so forth, never mind that USC has better talented freshmen each year sitting on the bench than many in the conference have as seniors.
 
What will be interesting will be the reaction from many at the other site if Peterson does win 11 games and Sark falls flat in some very winnable games as he did here and USC has a less than stellar season. My guess is that there would be the normal enabling excuses having to do with sanctions and so forth, never mind that USC has better talented freshmen each year sitting on the bench than many in the conference have as seniors.
Click to expand...

I'm hearing PhilBleenor knew Sarkgasm would be a shitty coach since before Jason Chorakkk sacked him 23 times in Husky Stadium in 1996.

Stop being a twister.
 
What will be interesting will be the reaction from many at the other site if Peterson does win 11 games and Sark falls flat in some very winnable games as he did here and USC has a less than stellar season. My guess is that there would be the normal enabling excuses having to do with sanctions and so forth, never mind that USC has better talented freshmen each year sitting on the bench than many in the conference have as seniors.
Click to expand...

Will people stop bringing up Sark losing down at USC while Petersen is winning at UW.

First of all, Sark left Petersen with a much better program. You Sark bashers should be thanking him from pulling his program out of the 0-12 hole to the point where any coach can just come in here and coach that team. While Sark took over for Lane Kiffin who ran that program into the ground. Sark needs to change the culture down there while Petersen doesn't as Sark left him a well oiled machine.

Second, injuries. Sark lost his backup long snapper. You can't survive without a backup long snapper. Once you find that out the season makes a lot more sense.

Third, Sanctions. Petersen has the luxury of having a full 85 while Sarkisian doesn't. Impossible to win when you don't have a full deck.

Now I know some of you will go twisting claiming I'm bashing on Petersen. I'm not so let's stop that now. However, to ignore the amazing talent that Sark left him is unfair to Sark. I think talent wise this team could beat the 1991 Huskies. Not saying they would beat the 1991 Huskies but Sark left him a team capable of beating the 1991 Huskies.

Some dumb fuck broke his nose then played through it.
 
Met a couple of the players recently. One of them said they just couldn't really "buy in" with Sark and said the change with the coaching staff has been fantastic.
Click to expand...

Meh. This is just classic confirmation bias. It's telling because we want it to be telling. But these exact comments are made by players every single time there's a regime change. Sometimes they're telling, sometimes they're not. Time will tell.

Either way it will be interesting.
Click to expand...

I would agree but I pretended like I was bummed to see Sark go and I got a *snicker* from both immediately after I said that.
 
What will be interesting will be the reaction from many at the other site if Peterson does win 11 games and Sark falls flat in some very winnable games as he did here and USC has a less than stellar season. My guess is that there would be the normal enabling excuses having to do with sanctions and so forth, never mind that USC has better talented freshmen each year sitting on the bench than many in the conference have as seniors.
Click to expand...

Will people stop bringing up Sark losing down at USC while Petersen is winning at UW.

First of all, Sark left Petersen with a much better program. You Sark bashers should be thanking him from pulling his program out of the 0-12 hole to the point where any coach can just come in here and coach that team. While Sark took over for Lane Kiffin who ran that program into the ground. Sark needs to change the culture down there while Petersen doesn't as Sark left him a well oiled machine.

Second, injuries. Sark lost his backup long snapper. You can't survive without a backup long snapper. Once you find that out the season makes a lot more sense.

Third, Sanctions. Petersen has the luxury of having a full 85 while Sarkisian doesn't. Impossible to win when you don't have a full deck.

Now I know some of you will go twisting claiming I'm bashing on Petersen. I'm not so let's stop that now. However, to ignore the amazing talent that Sark left him is unfair to Sark. I think talent wise this team could beat the 1991 Huskies. Not saying they would beat the 1991 Huskies but Sark left him a team capable of beating the 1991 Huskies.

Some dumb fuck broke his nose then played through it.
Click to expand...

Kim impressions aren't your forte, leave it to Road or someone else.
 
What will be interesting will be the reaction from many at the other site if Peterson does win 11 games and Sark falls flat in some very winnable games as he did here and USC has a less than stellar season. My guess is that there would be the normal enabling excuses having to do with sanctions and so forth, never mind that USC has better talented freshmen each year sitting on the bench than many in the conference have as seniors.
Click to expand...

Will people stop bringing up Sark losing down at USC while Petersen is winning at UW.

First of all, Sark left Petersen with a much better program. You Sark bashers should be thanking him from pulling his program out of the 0-12 hole to the point where any coach can just come in here and coach that team. While Sark took over for Lane Kiffin who ran that program into the ground. Sark needs to change the culture down there while Petersen doesn't as Sark left him a well oiled machine.

Second, injuries. Sark lost his backup long snapper. You can't survive without a backup long snapper. Once you find that out the season makes a lot more sense.

Third, Sanctions. Petersen has the luxury of having a full 85 while Sarkisian doesn't. Impossible to win when you don't have a full deck.

Now I know some of you will go twisting claiming I'm bashing on Petersen. I'm not so let's stop that now. However, to ignore the amazing talent that Sark left him is unfair to Sark. I think talent wise this team could beat the 1991 Huskies. Not saying they would beat the 1991 Huskies but Sark left him a team capable of beating the 1991 Huskies.

Some dumb fuck broke his nose then played through it.
Click to expand...

Kim impressions aren't your forte, leave it to Road or someone else.
Click to expand...

I was pretty spot on with my satire. Stick to telling us how Mike Leach is going to make a Rose Bowl........
 
Funny how Kiffin is a shitty coach and the players hate him, but you RARELY heard sanctions as an excuse. It was all Layla Kiffin. But when Sark wins 8 games including 2 that he pisses away himself, the sanctions excuse will be resurrected from the dead even though Sarktard only has to deal with the tail end of it.

God I hate our fans. Can you imagine SCfs fans saying it's OK Kiffin isn't going to Rose Bowls because John Robinson never had to face a RANKED Oregon State and the Arizona schools weren't serious about football? FYFMFOF.
 
Funny how Kiffin is a shitty coach and the players hate him, but you RARELY heard sanctions as an excuse. It was all Layla Kiffin. But when Sark wins 8 games including 2 that he pisses away himself, the sanctions excuse will be resurrected from the dead even though Sarktard only has to deal with the tail end of it.

God I hate our fans. Can you imagine SCfs fans saying it's OK Kiffin isn't going to Rose Bowls because John Robinson never had to face a RANKED Oregon State and the Arizona schools weren't serious about football? FYFMFOF.
Click to expand...

This is why it's going to be fun to see Sark get a giant dose of reality check. Better enjoy it while we can as at most he'll last four years there. I think only three myself.

They'll get tired of sloppy play, excuse making, being unprepared, personally cost his team 2 games a year, more excuse making, throwing others under the bus, etc.

Unlike our pussy ass fan base and media they won't tolerate that shit down there. Hell a lot of USC fans were pissed at that hire so he has to win them over quickly as their fan base is divided.
 
When the heat is on Sark this year, and UW is 8-1 or whatever, he will reference how good UW is to defend himself. Bank on it.

Secondly, Kim will not only credit Sark for Petersen's success this season but when UW takes a dip next year because of Sark's fucktarded OL recruiting he'll be sure to criticize Petersen.
 
I think there is a perception difference between Sark and Kiffin because of how they handle themselves with the media. Sark is given more leeway because he makes excuses and is friendlier than Kiffin, who is often grating and harsh with his comments. Doesn't change the fact that neither will win a championship, but Sark sells himself a little better than Lane does. They're both turds.
 
I'll give Sark credit his biggest strength is being a bullshit artist.

He's managed to trick two major football programs into hiring him and paying him pretty well.

He's good at excuses, very quick on his feet to have an excuse ready. Let's media members have access and be their friend so they will in turn give him a longer leash.

Good politician, shitty coach. Really glad he chose to LEAVE!
 
Met a couple of the players recently. One of them said they just couldn't really "buy in" with Sark and said the change with the coaching staff has been fantastic.
Click to expand...

Meh. This is just classic confirmation bias. It's telling because we want it to be telling. But these exact comments are made by players every single time there's a regime change. Sometimes they're telling, sometimes they're not. Time will tell.

Either way it will be interesting.
Click to expand...
In other words find the thread where this belongs. Or just try posting something original instead of plagiarism my shit fucko. This is precisely why this is the first response you've had in 8 months you bearded cunt ya
 
Not to jack the thread but I think Petersen is going to kill it overall and get off to a fast start with a better than expected season this year. The national consensus is 9-10 wins and some husky fans might think we can go 11-3. I think we go 12-2. Read between the lines in what many players have said. I think they play harder and better and I think the team will be closer together than last year. If Petersen is coaching last year we might have gone 11-2 instead of 9-4.
Click to expand...

my thoughts exactly
Click to expand...

Mine as well, if we don't have 10-11 wins at a minimum I would be greatly disappointed.
 
From this excellent Columns article:

What does your decision to take the UW job say about where you’re at in your career?

I’ve known about the tradition and history of this program and had been such an admirer. All the things that I have gone through in my career have really established a strong philosophy of what’s important. The University of Washington really represented that. The people that support this place, the passion, and just the power of this place added up to be something that I wanted to be a part of.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

I didn't even read the rest of the thread. The quote is why I'm a fucking doog for Petersen. This dude expects to win a national championship at UW. A fucking national championship. Sark was just hoping for the best that we won 8 or 9 games.
 
Last edited:
What will be interesting will be the reaction from many at the other site if Peterson does win 11 games and Sark falls flat in some very winnable games as he did here and USC has a less than stellar season. My guess is that there would be the normal enabling excuses having to do with sanctions and so forth, never mind that USC has better talented freshmen each year sitting on the bench than many in the conference have as seniors.
Click to expand...

Will people stop bringing up Sark losing down at USC while Petersen is winning at UW.

First of all, Sark left Petersen with a much better program. You Sark bashers should be thanking him from pulling his program out of the 0-12 hole to the point where any coach can just come in here and coach that team. While Sark took over for Lane Kiffin who ran that program into the ground. Sark needs to change the culture down there while Petersen doesn't as Sark left him a well oiled machine.

Second, injuries. Sark lost his backup long snapper. You can't survive without a backup long snapper. Once you find that out the season makes a lot more sense.

Third, Sanctions. Petersen has the luxury of having a full 85 while Sarkisian doesn't. Impossible to win when you don't have a full deck.

Now I know some of you will go twisting claiming I'm bashing on Petersen. I'm not so let's stop that now. However, to ignore the amazing talent that Sark left him is unfair to Sark. I think talent wise this team could beat the 1991 Huskies. Not saying they would beat the 1991 Huskies but Sark left him a team capable of beating the 1991 Huskies.

Some dumb fuck broke his nose then played through it.
Click to expand...

Way too long for a Kim Jong Vino impression combined with way too many words spelled correctly ... it's really hard to spell correctly when you're drinking cab's that drink like merlot's with bananas on the mind.
 
I think that there's a really good chance that we're 11-2 this season.

I have no problem "dooging out" for Petersen ... it's nice to have a grown up coach coaching a grown up program that expects to fucking win.

Bottom line is that Petersen gets that we're Washington damnit.
 
What will be interesting will be the reaction from many at the other site if Peterson does win 11 games and Sark falls flat in some very winnable games as he did here and USC has a less than stellar season. My guess is that there would be the normal enabling excuses having to do with sanctions and so forth, never mind that USC has better talented freshmen each year sitting on the bench than many in the conference have as seniors.
Click to expand...

Will people stop bringing up Sark losing down at USC while Petersen is winning at UW.

First of all, Sark left Petersen with a much better program. You Sark bashers should be thanking him from pulling his program out of the 0-12 hole to the point where any coach can just come in here and coach that team. While Sark took over for Lane Kiffin who ran that program into the ground. Sark needs to change the culture down there while Petersen doesn't as Sark left him a well oiled machine.

Second, injuries. Sark lost his backup long snapper. You can't survive without a backup long snapper. Once you find that out the season makes a lot more sense.

Third, Sanctions. Petersen has the luxury of having a full 85 while Sarkisian doesn't. Impossible to win when you don't have a full deck.

Now I know some of you will go twisting claiming I'm bashing on Petersen. I'm not so let's stop that now. However, to ignore the amazing talent that Sark left him is unfair to Sark. I think talent wise this team could beat the 1991 Huskies. Not saying they would beat the 1991 Huskies but Sark left him a team capable of beating the 1991 Huskies.

Some dumb fuck broke his nose then played through it.
Click to expand...

Way too long for a Kim Jong Vino impression combined with way too many words spelled correctly ... it's really hard to spell correctly when you're drinking cab's that drink like merlot's with bananas on the mind.
Click to expand...

Next
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top