The media is talking about the differences between Sark and Kiffin

  • Thread starter Thread starter [Deleted User]
  • Start date Start date
D

[Deleted User]

Guest
http://espn.go.com/college-football...an-brings-energy-enthusiasm-back-usc-football

By the time USC head coach Steve Sarkisian hit the big Four-Oh, he had earned two national championship rings as a Trojans assistant and pulled Washington football out of the ditch. Five years ago, the guy everyone calls Sark took over an 0-12 program in Seattle. The Huskies went 8-4 last season before USC called Sarkisian to come back.

Sarkisian won 34 games in Seattle. That's 15 more victories than John McKay won before he turned 40, not to mention 34 more than John Robinson and Pete Carroll won before they did.

I couldn't read more after this. I love how they act like UW is this poor little downtrodden program and it's a miracle to even win 8 games here.
 
when sark is consistently underachieving and Peterman is consistently winning 10+ games they'll finally understand Sark didn't do that great a job here.

You can take a lot away from what the doogs said, their excuses for sark were always stuff like "who will you get that's better" "he's building it the right way" "he's a good recruiter." Even the biggest of Sark apologists rarely said he was a championship coach at washington (exceptions can be made for a select few: KGFS, S14A, KVFS, etc.)
 
Last edited:
Question for the Doogs ... who's the best coach in the PAC 12 without coaching a single game in the conference?

Answer ... the person that fits the "who will you get that's better" than Sark response
 
New Scheme and a new attitude. Every player has spoke out about the difference between Kiffin 1.0 and Kiffen 2.0, we will see a much improved team
 
when sark is consistently underachieving and Peterman is consistently winning 10+ games they'll finally understand Sark didn't do that great a job here.

You can take a lot away from what the doogs said, their excuses for sark were always stuff like "who will you get that's better" "he's building it the right way" "he's a good recruiter." Even the biggest of Sark apologists rarely said he was a championship coach at washington (exceptions can be made for a select few: KGFS, S14A, KVFS, etc.)
Click to expand...

I think at first the Doogs thought he was a championship coach. I remember after the magical 5-7 year one many Doogs were drinking the Koolaid. I also recall a Doog calling into Softy's show saying we should expect a Rose Bowl by year three then Softy goes "Well remember we are losing Locker so it can't be 2011 and Polk is likely gone after 2011 so can't be 2012. I think 2013 is the earliest". So Softy was making excuses back in 2009.

After LSU in 2012 it was painfully obvious to even the Doogs that Sark wasn't a championship coach. So the expectations and narrative changed. That is when 0-12 was being used a lot. I recall 0-12 first being used sometime during 2011 after the Stanford ass kicking. They started to pain this picture like UW is WSU where you can't possibly ever win here.

Now it's "you gotta thank Sark for bringing our program back". I never remember thanking a coach from going from shitty to average. Did Seahawks fans thank Dennis Erickson? Did Mariners fans thank Jim Lebevere?

I've said it before but I think Doogman Doogs will be upset deep down inside when Petermen wins big here. It will ruin every Doog myth out there. Also when Sark underperforms at USC which is a blue blood school what will their excuses for him be? Sanctions? Sure they can use that but like Lambo in the 90's he'll be sending a shitload of guys to the NFL and not backing it up with the results.
 
when sark is consistently underachieving and Peterman is consistently winning 10+ games they'll finally understand Sark didn't do that great a job here.

You can take a lot away from what the doogs said, their excuses for sark were always stuff like "who will you get that's better" "he's building it the right way" "he's a good recruiter." Even the biggest of Sark apologists rarely said he was a championship coach at washington (exceptions can be made for a select few: KGFS, S14A, KVFS, etc.)
Click to expand...

I think at first the Doogs thought he was a championship coach. I remember after the magical 5-7 year one many Doogs were drinking the Koolaid. I also recall a Doog calling into Softy's show saying we should expect a Rose Bowl by year three then Softy goes "Well remember we are losing Locker so it can't be 2011 and Polk is likely gone after 2011 so can't be 2012. I think 2013 is the earliest". So Softy was making excuses back in 2009.

After LSU in 2012 it was painfully obvious to even the Doogs that Sark wasn't a championship coach. So the expectations and narrative changed. That is when 0-12 was being used a lot. I recall 0-12 first being used sometime during 2011 after the Stanford ass kicking. They started to pain this picture like UW is WSU where you can't possibly ever win here.

Now it's "you gotta thank Sark for bringing our program back". I never remember thanking a coach from going from shitty to average. Did Seahawks fans thank Dennis Erickson? Did Mariners fans thank Jim Lebevere?

I've said it before but I think Doogman Doogs will be upset deep down inside when Petermen wins big here. It will ruin every Doog myth out there. Also when Sark underperforms at USC which is a blue blood school what will their excuses for him be? Sanctions? Sure they can use that but like Lambo in the 90's he'll be sending a shitload of guys to the NFL and not backing it up with the results.
Click to expand...

The Doogs will never give Peterman credit for winning, they will always say it was Sark's foundation.

And I remember there were a lot of Lefebvre Believers out there who didn't want him to go.
 
@HNMT, nice post but I disagree about even doogs realizing Sark wasn't a championship coach after the LSU game. It was bothersome how few were pissed off about that game.
 
@HNMT, nice post but I disagree about even doogs realizing Sark wasn't a championship coach after the LSU game. It was bothersome how few were pissed off about that game.
Click to expand...

I said realized he wasn't a championship coach for a reason. They weren't upset, they actually accepted that we'll never be a championship team under him. They started acting like Coogs in that there is no point getting mad because we just aren't at that level.

They conceded ever being a championship program with him. That is when 0-12 started to be repeated, how UW is the only program to have played in back to back bowl games besides Stanford and Oregon. Well nobody is wanting their coaches fired. James got blown out at LSU as well did you want him fired?

When arguing for Sark no more was it he can lead us to a Rose Bowl, the argument changed. It was shitting on James, bringing up 0-12 and it could be worse we could still have Ty.
 
@HNMT, nice post but I disagree about even doogs realizing Sark wasn't a championship coach after the LSU game. It was bothersome how few were pissed off about that game.
Click to expand...

I said realized he wasn't a championship coach for a reason. They weren't upset, they actually accepted that we'll never be a championship team under him. They started acting like Coogs in that there is no point getting mad because we just aren't at that level.

They conceded ever being a championship program with him. That is when 0-12 started to be repeated, how UW is the only program to have played in back to back bowl games besides Stanford and Oregon. Well nobody is wanting their coaches fired. James got blown out at LSU as well did you want him fired?

When arguing for Sark no more was it he can lead us to a Rose Bowl, the argument changed. It was shitting on James, bringing up 0-12 and it could be worse we could still have Ty.
Click to expand...

The James comparison was their desperation move. By 1983 (the yr. LSU blew us out), James was well established, had made Rose Bowls, and had the team ranked no. 1 in the polls the year before. Sark really hadn't done shit before that game besides beat bad teams and N once.
 
@HNMT, nice post but I disagree about even doogs realizing Sark wasn't a championship coach after the LSU game. It was bothersome how few were pissed off about that game.
Click to expand...

I said realized he wasn't a championship coach for a reason. They weren't upset, they actually accepted that we'll never be a championship team under him. They started acting like Coogs in that there is no point getting mad because we just aren't at that level.

They conceded ever being a championship program with him. That is when 0-12 started to be repeated, how UW is the only program to have played in back to back bowl games besides Stanford and Oregon. Well nobody is wanting their coaches fired. James got blown out at LSU as well did you want him fired?

When arguing for Sark no more was it he can lead us to a Rose Bowl, the argument changed. It was shitting on James, bringing up 0-12 and it could be worse we could still have Ty.
Click to expand...

The James comparison was their desperation move. By 1983 (the yr. LSU blew us out), James was well established, had made Rose Bowls, and had the team ranked no. 1 in the polls the year before. Sark really hadn't done shit before that game besides beat bad teams and N once.
Click to expand...

The Doogs loved to talk about James 1985-1988 more than his 1991 season as they tried to tear him down to build up Sark.

Sad this is James worst four year stretch from 1985-1988 was still better than any of Sark's four year stretches.
 
@HNMT, nice post but I disagree about even doogs realizing Sark wasn't a championship coach after the LSU game. It was bothersome how few were pissed off about that game.
Click to expand...

I was too busy getting drunk on Bourbon Street ... fuck off.
 
BTW surprised I didn't catch this but article is wrong. Sark never won two national titles.

He was coaching in Oakland in 2004. Figured Espn would do some damn research.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top