Helfrich already showing that he's a smarter coach than Sark

[[Deleted User]]

Meanwhile, I think this is a key year for Shaw at Stanford. They won 8 games last year by a TD or less and were not as dominant as they were in 10-11. They also lose some key seniors after this season. Everyone is jumping on their nuts now but I see them having trouble getting 10 wins. I think they could win 9 this year and only win 7-8 next year.

I agree with you about Stanford but am tired of being wrong about them. When they lost Gerhart many thought they'd take a slight step back instead they won the Orange Bowl. Then Harbaugh left and some thought they'd take a slight step back and they went to the Fiesta Bowl. Then Luck graduates and they weren't on anyone's radar to win the Pac-12 yet they won the Pac-12 finally and then a Rose Bowl.

Although I'm still iffy on Shaw as a head coach. I know he's only lost 4 games in his career as a head coach and has won at Autzen even. He has also had some brutal moments in those losses that were head scratching.

I do look at metrics too and it's hard to sustain that type of good run. Why I laugh when Sark and other doogs say they were a 9-4 team because in reality they were lucky to even be 7-6. Sark has been very lucky to be 26-25.

 

[HeretoBeatmyChest]

USC was a top 5 team as far as the metrics in 2011. In the coming years, the negative effects of the sanctions wear off and if Kiffin falters again he'll be canned in favor of someone definitely better. UCLA is only going to get better. Stanford at the least will be a solid team. WSU will get better. Cal will get better. Rodriguez at UA is a proven coach and they are no longer happy with winning 6-7 games. UW has its most talented team in a while and talent will be better again next year.

Helfrich is going to face a much tougher conference than Chip. Chip's only competition was Harbaugh. UW was wrecked by the Ty years and Sark's mediocrity prevented a faster turnaround. USC was dealing with sanctions. UCLA was stuck. Cal had already peaked. OSU, UA, ASU were not a threat.

If UW can get rid of Sark in 13/14 then the new coach could build things up while Oregon and Stanford have peaked and it sets up to make a good run into the end of the decade.

 

[Global]

Oregon has the coaching staff with the greatest longevity in the PAC-12 and this has been true for a while. Their system has been to avoid the coaching carousel that plagues other programs, including Washington. It is risky because you have to stick with a coaching team for 5-10-15 or more years. And you have to be able to keep them when you become successful. Oregon has been able to do that to a remarkable degree. It is one of their keys to success, and hard to replicate. The key is making good hires to begin with. The UW keeps failing at that fundamental task, and that has been so since Lambo's era.

 

[DeepSeaZ]

I'll take Race's position any day. Success breeds success as long as you continue to work for it. We never would/could adopt "Bow down to Washington" without this mentality.

Is Mike Riley one of those guys who has gotten called underrated for so long that he has become overrated?

Shit, morons like idawg were saying Reilly was better than Carroll years ago when Pete was winning 11+ games every year. It's not that he was called underrated, it's that some people actually thought he was great and he is not even close to that.

iDawg: I want a coach who does more with less.

Race: No you want a coach who does more with more.