If Section14a Fucking Stupid ever decides to join and start posting, he's going to quit on the motherfucking spot.
The standards of success for Husky Football 2013
- Thread starter DerekJohnson
- Start date
MikeDamone
Active poster
Diversity is good.
MikeDamone
Active poster
Mora, but his CONTRACT might be an issue. So I've heard.
TierbsHsotBoobs
New Fish
As long as you have Woodward as the AD, you're just rearranging deck chairs.
He needs to go yesterday.
ACSlaterDawg
New Fish
I think most would have to agree that Woodward deserves huge credit for the stadium project and facilitating the raising of the bar to get the assistant coaches. I thought Woodward was a bad hire but those are points that shows the AD does care about football. Now, I am concerned about how he will handle Sark.
TierbsHsotBoobs
New Fish
Have you read anything Woodward has said about Sark and Romar...well...ever?
Woodward is managing straight out of the Marinerization playbook.
ACSlaterDawg
New Fish
Actions > Words
Emmert for example said the right things then didn't take any action when it was needed. Woodie got the stadium project rolling and facilitated the hiring of top-line assistants...and I'll go one further and point out that Sark was probably his 5th choice. Emmert plunged this program deeper into the abyss when he pussied out of firing Losingham when Mora was there for the taking. But as I said, I dont have confidence in how Woodward will handle Sark.
Emmert for example said the right things then didn't take any action when it was needed. Woodie got the stadium project rolling and facilitated the hiring of top-line assistants...and I'll go one further and point out that Sark was probably his 5th choice. Emmert plunged this program deeper into the abyss when he pussied out of firing Losingham when Mora was there for the taking. But as I said, I dont have confidence in how Woodward will handle Sark.
RE: facilitated the hiring of top assistants.
The first best staff in America or the guys that replaced them and became the second best staff in America? I think both staffs are over rated. Pool boy threw money at a problem of his own making
The first best staff in America or the guys that replaced them and became the second best staff in America? I think both staffs are over rated. Pool boy threw money at a problem of his own making
TierbsHsotBoobs
New Fish
Woodward is Emmert's pool boy. Trying to separate the two is Doogtarded.
ACSlaterDawg
New Fish
I like to stick to my talking points even though they are wrong and outdated.
Check the rules at the top of the board. TierbsHsotBoobs works hard on his outdated talking points and we're lucky to have them here.
Little early to claim pool boy isn't who we thought he was. He has UW on the hook for a quarter billion and a shitty team that won't fill it
Little early to claim pool boy isn't who we thought he was. He has UW on the hook for a quarter billion and a shitty team that won't fill it
TierbsHsotBoobs
New Fish
Please feel free to cite any outdated talking points.
Woodward is the guy who hired Sark and has defended his consistent mediocrity for the past four years.
Woodward himself is the guy who inspired the incremental progress joke of 7-6 > 7-6 > 7-6. That talking point is completely relevant.
ACSlaterDawg
New Fish
The incremental progress comment after the AC is fucking stupid but what is he supposed to say publicly? We haven't improved in 3 years and need to win 9-10 next year? Other teams would use it against UW in recruiting. Again, actions > words.
Like I said, Woodie has actually done some good things and the pool boy moniker is silly at this point.
Going forward, its his #1 job to make sure there is a strong football program and that stadium is filled and I'm less confident about that.
Like I said, Woodie has actually done some good things and the pool boy moniker is silly at this point.
Going forward, its his #1 job to make sure there is a strong football program and that stadium is filled and I'm less confident about that.
Last edited:
TierbsHsotBoobs
New Fish
A real AD would have actually fired Sark's sorry ass at midfield of Martin Vandal Stadium after the Apple Cup to address that problem.
Woodward got his job by being a pool boy and continues to tolerate mediocrity because he's a pool boy.
HTH
The key to a good season is not so much wins and losses, but how the dawgs compete against the tough teams. Even if they loose to Stanford, Oregon, ASU, Arizona, Ucla, if they make it competitive and close then it will be a sign that the program is on an upward spiral. If the blowouts continue , then Sark will really be on the hot seat. I see as most likely an 8-4 season. The key in the losses is how close are they.
Some here will mock you for saying this, but I agree. While I do think Sark should have 4-6 more wins during his reign, the blowouts are what really piss me off. They are happening multiple times every season and they need to stop.
8-4 with no blowouts would be a huge step in the rifht direction where I could actually believe we could win 10 or 11 in 2014. Unfortunately, I know we will get blown out at least a couple times.
TierbsHsotBoobs
New Fish
8-4 with this schedule is still mediocre bullshit.
Hope this helps.
ACSlaterDawg
New Fish
Actually boobs, it really depends. Say UW makes two more FGs and is 9-4 last year. Everyone would be saying its a top 20 team that would go 9-3 or 10-2. But, that would overlook the stats and metrics (like point differential) that say it was a mediocre, 7-5 team that would not be ready to improve in terms of W/L.
Texas A&M was 7-6 in 2011 but their point differential was +11ppg. They had numerous very close losses. Thus, they were in position to make a significant jump in W/L the next season.
If you are 8-4 and +5ppg then thats mediocre. But if UW is 8-4 and average +13ppg then that is considerable improvement.
However, 8 wins is the worst fucking outcome possible. 7 and theres a decent chance Sark is gone. 9 and thats enough to have another solid recruiting class which would give you two in a row (09-12 classes were mediocre as a whole, last one was good) and raise expectations to 10 wins & Pac12 north title in 2014. 8 wins placates the fag fans, the media, takes pressure off the AD and confirms that mushrooms will grow out of my ass before Sark ever catches a whiff of whats needed to field and coach a championship squad.
Texas A&M was 7-6 in 2011 but their point differential was +11ppg. They had numerous very close losses. Thus, they were in position to make a significant jump in W/L the next season.
If you are 8-4 and +5ppg then thats mediocre. But if UW is 8-4 and average +13ppg then that is considerable improvement.
However, 8 wins is the worst fucking outcome possible. 7 and theres a decent chance Sark is gone. 9 and thats enough to have another solid recruiting class which would give you two in a row (09-12 classes were mediocre as a whole, last one was good) and raise expectations to 10 wins & Pac12 north title in 2014. 8 wins placates the fag fans, the media, takes pressure off the AD and confirms that mushrooms will grow out of my ass before Sark ever catches a whiff of whats needed to field and coach a championship squad.
MikeDamone
Active poster
Exactly. In 2011 the doogs said 7 wins showed progress. They were ecstatic hat the team started 6-2. The metics said bullshit. The schedule was front loaded with the easier games. The Arizona game was won with the luckiest, most improbable interception ever that got them to "house money". They were crushed by Nebraska , Stanford Oregon, USC, And Oregon State. Sark wasn't the problem they said, it was Holt who previously was known as the best DC in America. But they got 7 wins. You're right, this year if they get to 8, you should start farming mushrooms from your ass. I would even say start that up if they get to 7.