JaWarrenJaHooker
Active poster
Things faggot doogs say
tallest midget:
![]()
smartest one in the dumb row:
![]()
The worst part is that Petersen hasn't been as good as Sark. Unless you count close losses as moral victories. I'm sure there is some metric that shows how Petersen is better, but Sark had a better conference record (9-9 vs Pete's current 6-10) and had more quality wins.
In Sark's first two years, he played LSU, Notre Dame, and Nebraska. Petersen's toughest non conference game is Boise State.
Sark's first two years > Petersen's.
The worst part is that Petersen hasn't been as good as Sark. Unless you count close losses as moral victories. I'm sure there is some metric that shows how Petersen is better, but Sark had a better conference record (9-9 vs Pete's current 6-10) and had more quality wins.
In Sark's first two years, he played LSU, Notre Dame, and Nebraska. Petersen's toughest non conference game is Boise State.
Sark's first two years > Petersen's.
To be fair, Sark won with Ty's "shitty players" and none of Sark's "monster recruiting classes" are left. Well except Mickens and a few other "studs".
Don't really like the Sark comparisons. I actually think Sark inherited more - Locker, Kearse, Polk, a good Kavario Middleton, Ta'Amu, Donald Bultler, Mason Foster, Daniel Te'O Neaheim, Devin Aguilar, Victor Aiyewa, mature Juan Garcia (and an OL and DB whose names I can't remember).
What drives me nuts is the complex scheme that results in a freshman QB turning the ball over, the failure to teach a 2-minute offense that a freshman can run, and over-emphasis on the passing game with a young QB and pedestrian WRs.
As a result, when the team fails a "loser mentality" gets engrained. "Here we go again."
Sark inherited a more seasoned team, but Petersen's approach to what he inherited is not good.
Things faggot doogs say
Good point. After all, they all have the same record.