The program needs to advance every year

[MikeDamone]

"This D staff can build a championship defense because Wilcox is very good and Tosh and Sirmon can recruit. And Sirmon and Heyward did quite well at their positions in year one."

Where is the evidence to back this statement?

The two years at Tennessee seem to directly contradict the statement.

I gave you the evidence.....coaching (improved D's at every stop-includes Tennessee) plus improved recruiting. Wilcox has never had great talent to work with but with this recruiting staff the D talent in the pipeline is already quite good. If we win 9+ games than the pipeline will grow stronger. I do think this staff if it stays together for another 2 years can build a top 10 defense nationally.

The coaching and recruiting is enough to get to the top 20 or so. The recruits aren't top 10 level (nowhere close, in fact) and the coaching is not significantly above average.

Hope this helps.

So going from over 100th to 34th then to top 20......sounds pretty damn good to me. Not significantly above average? Apparently you'd rather engage in a lemon party then be forced to admit anything factually positive about UW. The D recruits since Tosh & Sirmon arrived are top 15 level. Never said they were top 10, but if UW has tangible improvement this year and next, they should be able to get top 10 recruits on defense.

Um..they haven't been in the top 20. Hth

 

[MikeDamone]

"This D staff can build a championship defense because Wilcox is very good and Tosh and Sirmon can recruit. And Sirmon and Heyward did quite well at their positions in year one."

Where is the evidence to back this statement?

The two years at Tennessee seem to directly contradict the statement.

I gave you the evidence.....coaching (improved D's at every stop-includes Tennessee) plus improved recruiting. Wilcox has never had great talent to work with but with this recruiting staff the D talent in the pipeline is already quite good. If we win 9+ games than the pipeline will grow stronger. I do think this staff if it stays together for another 2 years can build a top 10 defense nationally.

Improved recruiting? Everyone says so.

The facts say so. Where everyone is wrong is that Sark is not a good recruiter. Yes, on paper the rankings say the classes don't look much different but since Tosh & Sirmon arrived the average stars per player are much higher and the 10-20th best recruits are far far better than they were before.

You don't get it. You will know how good a class was after they take the field. Who actually makes it in to school, who sticks it out, and ultimately who contributes.

 

[[Deleted User]]

"This D staff can build a championship defense because Wilcox is very good and Tosh and Sirmon can recruit. And Sirmon and Heyward did quite well at their positions in year one."

Where is the evidence to back this statement?

The two years at Tennessee seem to directly contradict the statement.

I gave you the evidence.....coaching (improved D's at every stop-includes Tennessee) plus improved recruiting. Wilcox has never had great talent to work with but with this recruiting staff the D talent in the pipeline is already quite good. If we win 9+ games than the pipeline will grow stronger. I do think this staff if it stays together for another 2 years can build a top 10 defense nationally.

Improved recruiting? Everyone says so.

The facts say so. Where everyone is wrong is that Sark is not a good recruiter. Yes, on paper the rankings say the classes don't look much different but since Tosh & Sirmon arrived the average stars per player are much higher and the 10-20th best recruits are far far better than they were before.

You don't get it. You will know how good a class was after they take the field. Who actually makes it in to school, who sticks it out, and ultimately who contributes.

So you're saying the heralded 2008 class that saved Ty's job wasn't really the 12th best class in the nation?

Also for you recruiting fans go look at our highly rated 2010 class then get back to me.

 

[Southerndawg]

"This D staff can build a championship defense because Wilcox is very good and Tosh and Sirmon can recruit. And Sirmon and Heyward did quite well at their positions in year one."

Where is the evidence to back this statement?

The two years at Tennessee seem to directly contradict the statement.

I gave you the evidence.....coaching (improved D's at every stop-includes Tennessee) plus improved recruiting. Wilcox has never had great talent to work with but with this recruiting staff the D talent in the pipeline is already quite good. If we win 9+ games than the pipeline will grow stronger. I do think this staff if it stays together for another 2 years can build a top 10 defense nationally.

Improved recruiting? Everyone says so.

The facts say so. Where everyone is wrong is that Sark is not a good recruiter. Yes, on paper the rankings say the classes don't look much different but since Tosh & Sirmon arrived the average stars per player are much higher and the 10-20th best recruits are far far better than they were before.

You don't get it. You will know how good a class was after they take the field. Who actually makes it in to school, who sticks it out, and ultimately who contributes.

I agree with this, and would add the obvious. Coaching influences have a very real impact on the performance of a class, from recruiting emphasis on proper player characteristics and projected positions to player development. I do believe Wilcox and Co. are real improvements over the staff they replaced, but to what degree remains to be seen. The problem at this juncture is that even if they turn out to be defensive geniuses, the offense took a big step back last year, and the special teams are not so special. Seven win Steve is still Seven win Steve. Maybe that changes this year, but I seriously doubt it.

 

[TMacDawg]

There are boreds that prefer to look at bright spots among the rubble.

There are boreds that like to pretend we were 9-4 last year.

There are boreds that like to believe Sark's 26-25 record portends great things for the program.

There are boreds that like to pretend that the wins against Stanford, Oregon St. and Cal were not gift-wrapped last year.

There are boreds that like to overlook the frequent plunger rapings and inexcusable collapses in winnable games that are the hallmark of the Sarkisian era.

This is not one of them.

 

[LoneStarDawg]

There are boreds that prefer to look at bright spots among the rubble.

There are boreds that like to pretend we were 9-4 last year.

There are boreds that like to believe Sark's 26-25 record portends great things for the program.

There are boreds that like to pretend that the wins against Stanford, Oregon St. and Cal were not gift-wrapped last year.

There are boreds that like to overlook the frequent plunger rapings and inexcusable collapses in winnable games that are the hallmark of the Sarkisian era.

This is not one of them.

I'd like to think this bored is one that has good fans who see through the bullshit and see things before they happen. Not necessarily always a negative thing, but for UW since 2001 (or 1994? or 92?) it has been a negative thing.

 

[BennyBeaver]

the thing you have with Wilcox is he teaches dirty, undisciplined football.

so you have that going for you, which is nice.