Gladstone
New Fish
Everything!
All of the doog excuses I see on various boards drive me nuts. Excuses are for losers. It’s clear why we haven’t won since 2000. Bad coaches. The end. Did you know Oklahoma went through four coaches in nine years until they found Stoops? Notre Dame went through lowly Davie, Willingham, and Weis until they landed Brian Kelly. Despite all of its inherent advantages in location, tradition, and culture -- USC was awful in the years before Carrol and awful after him. Why has Miami been bad recently? Alabama was bad before Saban and went through three coaches in ten years. The difference between UW and all those programs is that people accepted the fucking doog excuses: he needs more time. Buy into the system. The culture of college football has changed. Be happy we're even in the conversation.
I always respected ND for firing Willingham knowing full well the PC backlash would be enormous. He was the only coach in their history who couldn't recruit and was famous for disappearing on golf courses for hours on end. One story in particular: they had a top recruit waiting in Willingham's office for six fucking hours and their AD had to personally go to the golf course and drag Willignham back to campus.
VTech was a perennial doormat until Beamer arrived. Jim Harbaugh turned a bunch of soft, finesse Stanford kids into the meanest, toughest SOBs in the land. Those Stanford teams were on par with Willingham's UW squads before Harbaugh arrived.
With the exception of Frank Beamer, every current top CFB coach (source:http://www.sportingnews.com/ncaa-fo...ck-saban-chris-petersen-urban-meyer-les-miles) proved they were tier 1 by their fourth year. I measured tier 1 by BCS bowl and/or national championship and/or conference championship and/or .700% winning.
I hope I am proven wrong, but Sark would be a huge outlier if he managed to turn us into a consistent BCS-contending team.
All of the doog excuses I see on various boards drive me nuts. Excuses are for losers. It’s clear why we haven’t won since 2000. Bad coaches. The end. Did you know Oklahoma went through four coaches in nine years until they found Stoops? Notre Dame went through lowly Davie, Willingham, and Weis until they landed Brian Kelly. Despite all of its inherent advantages in location, tradition, and culture -- USC was awful in the years before Carrol and awful after him. Why has Miami been bad recently? Alabama was bad before Saban and went through three coaches in ten years. The difference between UW and all those programs is that people accepted the fucking doog excuses: he needs more time. Buy into the system. The culture of college football has changed. Be happy we're even in the conversation.
I always respected ND for firing Willingham knowing full well the PC backlash would be enormous. He was the only coach in their history who couldn't recruit and was famous for disappearing on golf courses for hours on end. One story in particular: they had a top recruit waiting in Willingham's office for six fucking hours and their AD had to personally go to the golf course and drag Willignham back to campus.
VTech was a perennial doormat until Beamer arrived. Jim Harbaugh turned a bunch of soft, finesse Stanford kids into the meanest, toughest SOBs in the land. Those Stanford teams were on par with Willingham's UW squads before Harbaugh arrived.
With the exception of Frank Beamer, every current top CFB coach (source:http://www.sportingnews.com/ncaa-fo...ck-saban-chris-petersen-urban-meyer-les-miles) proved they were tier 1 by their fourth year. I measured tier 1 by BCS bowl and/or national championship and/or conference championship and/or .700% winning.
I hope I am proven wrong, but Sark would be a huge outlier if he managed to turn us into a consistent BCS-contending team.