Tequila says we are close to breaking through

Link doesn't work, but I'm not surprised at all. Tequilla was one of the ring leaders saying this was going to be a 10 win season.
 
Fleenor thinks most of the poasters on Dawgman want Sark fired. So much for the lunatic fringe.

VLR!
 
Sorry guys ... My phone is fucked so kinky is fucked. Bleenor did meanderings ... It's the uge ... Cept with Bleenor .. Tequila suspects we are close to breaking through .

Is that our tequila?
 
Outside of some talent on the OL/DL (and the DL talent is coming from the Mathis, Farria, Qualls class), there's enough talent on this team to have gone 6-3 in conference, go 9-3 during the season, and get a 10th win in a bowl game.

Of course, coaching matters and you could argue that we've pissed away games against Stanford and UCLA due to some sloppy coaching and there's always the potential that we'll piss away at least one of Oregon St and Washington St as well.

You can't tell me that with a few tweaks in the direction of the program that you could easily see an uptick of 2-3 conference wins next year versus 2013 levels.

I don't have any significant problems with our defensive coaches - generally speaking I think it's the best side of the ball for us. If a change was made w/ Sark, I'd recommend that the new coach considers retaining most of that staff.

Kisaeu is a far better WR coach than he was a QB coach - you can see areas where our WRs have gotten better. I'm not against him remaining on staff. That being said, there's no way that Sark would ever turn the controls over to him as OC.

Poppau or whatever his name is is a young coach - not really sure what he's bringing to the table at this point. I would think you could upgrade here but also don't have a problem with one young coach on the staff that is young and eager.

I don't buy the arguments that Price is anything more than an upper middle PAC QB, but his play this year is significantly better. I think Tui deserves credit for that. Miles looked like he has a reasonable chance to play well. Generally speaking I've been impressed by what I've seen by all the QBs on our roster under Tui. I would retain him. I don't think that he's ready to be a OC.

Between our struggles on the OL in recruiting and some of the painful performances over the years, while I don't think Cozzetto is a terrible coach, I think he's an obvious place to consider a replacement.

I've struggled for a while to figure out what football-related value Nansen brings to the table. If his value is as recruiting coordinator, I'd think that he holds more value in a football operations role.

If Sark is retained, he's got to take on far more of a CEO role and push some of the responsibilities that he currently holds onto down to those under him and give them more responsibility. He needs to focus on the big picture issues and the biggest one he needs to look into is general accountability in the program. He talks a lot about the problems - so I know he sees them. But since they continue to reappear, he's not doing a sufficient job of fixing those problems.

My personal recommendation would be that Sark hasn't shown an ability to fix his problems. They are now a trend with no fix in sight. I'd replace him and have the hope/expectation that I would be able to retain approximately half of the staff. I don't think that the assistants (with a couple of exceptions) are the problem - I think the issues that we have tend to stem from the top.

 
TL, DR. The only thing we are close to is another 4th place finish in the North. If all goes right, maybe we can get third in 2014. Yippee!!!
 
TL, DR. The only thing we are close to is another 4th place finish in the North. If all goes right, maybe we can get third in 2014. Yippee!!!
Click to expand...
Tequila Long, Didn't Read?

 
Outside of some talent on the OL/DL (and the DL talent is coming from the Mathis, Farria, Qualls class), there's enough talent on this team to have gone 6-3 in conference, go 9-3 during the season, and get a 10th win in a bowl game.

Of course, coaching matters and you could argue that we've pissed away games against Stanford and UCLA due to some sloppy coaching and there's always the potential that we'll piss away at least one of Oregon St and Washington St as well.

You can't tell me that with a few tweaks in the direction of the program that you could easily see an uptick of 2-3 conference wins next year versus 2013 levels.

I don't have any significant problems with our defensive coaches - generally speaking I think it's the best side of the ball for us. If a change was made w/ Sark, I'd recommend that the new coach considers retaining most of that staff.

Kisaeu is a far better WR coach than he was a QB coach - you can see areas where our WRs have gotten better. I'm not against him remaining on staff. That being said, there's no way that Sark would ever turn the controls over to him as OC.

Poppau or whatever his name is is a young coach - not really sure what he's bringing to the table at this point. I would think you could upgrade here but also don't have a problem with one young coach on the staff that is young and eager.

I don't buy the arguments that Price is anything more than an upper middle PAC QB, but his play this year is significantly better. I think Tui deserves credit for that. Miles looked like he has a reasonable chance to play well. Generally speaking I've been impressed by what I've seen by all the QBs on our roster under Tui. I would retain him. I don't think that he's ready to be a OC.

Between our struggles on the OL in recruiting and some of the painful performances over the years, while I don't think Cozzetto is a terrible coach, I think he's an obvious place to consider a replacement.

I've struggled for a while to figure out what football-related value Nansen brings to the table. If his value is as recruiting coordinator, I'd think that he holds more value in a football operations role.

If Sark is retained, he's got to take on far more of a CEO role and push some of the responsibilities that he currently holds onto down to those under him and give them more responsibility. He needs to focus on the big picture issues and the biggest one he needs to look into is general accountability in the program. He talks a lot about the problems - so I know he sees them. But since they continue to reappear, he's not doing a sufficient job of fixing those problems.

My personal recommendation would be that Sark hasn't shown an ability to fix his problems. They are now a trend with no fix in sight. I'd replace him and have the hope/expectation that I would be able to retain approximately half of the staff. I don't think that the assistants (with a couple of exceptions) are the problem - I think the issues that we have tend to stem from the top.
Click to expand...

I actually read your post to see if you had written anything worthwhile or insightful. There was way too much analysis for something we already know. Sark is an average coach, and it's not going to change. I don't disagree that the talent was there to win 10, but the coaching never was.

The assistants are fine. The "great" assistants that Oregon has have been a part of some very good, but also some shitty teams. The difference was Chip Kelly. Once he came on board, these guys looked great. Alabama has assistants that were not smashing successes everywhere they went. Some of them had even been fired at previous stops. I'm not saying having good assistants is not important, but the head coach is what really matters.

There's no need to write a novel explaining that our problems stem from the top. Everyone already know that.

 
Last edited:
Yep - I could have made it shorter.

Bottom line is that there's a lot there to work with in this program. Sark deserves credit for that. That's never been the issue.

The issue is can he get that talent over the next hump.
 
Yep - I could have made it shorter.

Bottom line is that there's a lot there to work with in this program. Sark deserves credit for that. That's never been the issue.

The issue is can he get that talent over the next hump.
Click to expand...

Sark has brought in some solid skill position talent. I will give him credit for the secondary as well with guys like Sean Parker and Marcus Peters. John Timu has been playing a lot better so ill give him that as well.

Overall Sark's talent typically looks a lot better on paper than what actually plays out on the field. However, when I look at the offers that a lot of his big 4 star recruits have gotten it is a lot of WSU/Col/Cal/UCLA (pre Mora)/Portland St./San Jose State etc.

He has a really bad track record at landing guys who have offers from Oregon/USC/UCLA (Mora)/Stanford. Hell Arizona State is going to start to beat us.

His recruiting is really overrated. I wouldn't qualify it as bad except for the beef he gets which has been nothing short of a dreckfest so far (the most important positions on the field, weird).
 
Anyone know of any free wheelchair repair around here? Messed up my back axle reading this thread

d86cae8443922b1dc9ddaeebff8bc0.jpg
 
Last edited:
Yep - I could have made it shorter.

Bottom line is that there's a lot there to work with in this program. Sark deserves credit for that. That's never been the issue.

The issue is can he get that talent over the next hump.
Click to expand...

Dude, the question has been answered.
 
I look forward to when we have a coach where every year people are saying, "if things had gone a little differently we might have gone 9-4 instead of 11-2". I am sick and tired of where every year people are saying, "if things had gone a little differently we might have gone 9-4 instead of 7-6". This is a trend. It feels like every Husky fan who supports Sark has noticed this trend but instead of identifying him as a perennial underachiever they just play make-believe and pretend he won the games. It is insane.
 
Yep - I could have made it shorter.

Bottom line is that there's a lot there to work with in this program. Sark deserves credit for that. That's never been the issue.

The issue is can he get that talent over the next hump.
Click to expand...

Dude, the question has been answered.
Click to expand...

It was meant as a rhetorical question - put a . instead of a ?

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